ArticleVaccines2022
Experience of COVID-19 Vaccination among Primary Healthcare Workers in Hong Kong: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acceptance-Hesitancy of COVID-19 Vaccination and Factors Affecting It in Adults: Systematic Review Study.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2024Pooled it
- Understanding Healthcare Workers' COVID-19 Vaccination Decision-Making as a Dynamic Process: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis.Vaccines · 2026Review
- Better to Be Unpaid than COVID-19 Vaccinated! A Qualitative Study on Italian Nurses Suspended from Work without Salary.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Views and Challenges of COVID-19 Vaccination in the Primary Health Care Sector. A Qualitative Study.Vaccines · 2023Article
- COVID-19 vaccine knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of health care workers in Perth, Western Australia: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies show that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy exists among healthcare workers (HCWs). Past personal experiences of vaccination, such as the seasonal influenza vaccination, influence individuals' intention to receive future vaccinations. This study aimed to explore the experience of COVID-19 vaccination among primary care HCWs in Hong Kong. A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted. Twenty-eight HCWs (ten doctors, ten nurses, and eight supporting staff) working in nine government-funded primary care clinics in Hong Kong who had completed at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccination were interviewed. Four themes were generated, namely, the cognitive and emotional battle of vaccine hesitancy, catalysts for vaccine acceptance, blasting vaccination myths, and being a positive influence. Providing timely, adequate, and transparent vaccine information and addressing the specific concerns of HCWs about the COVID-19 vaccine could enhance their vaccination uptake in future. Specific vaccine promotion strategies, such as the sharing of vaccination experiences targeted at different subgroups of HCWs, may improve vaccine acceptance through informational social influence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.