ArticleVaccines2022
COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Health Professional Students: Cross-Sectional Data from the First Wave of the HOLISTIC Cohort 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Vaccine hesitancy has been observed around the world, but there is a paucity of data among a broad range of U.S. health professional students. The goal of this report is to present findings about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among a cross-section of U.S. health professional students and determine if hesitancy varies by demographic characteristics, health science college, and other factors. A cross-sectional analysis of HOLISTIC Cohort Study participants enrolled from April 14 2021 to May 5 2021 at seven health sciences colleges in the University of Illinois Chicago was used. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were used to evaluate vaccine hesitancy items and identify domains. Among 555 health professional students, three domains (perceived benefit, trustworthiness, and risk) contribute to vaccine hesitancy. Significant differences were observed in the domains among students of different races as well as vaccination history. Compared to students in the College of Medicine, students in the Colleges of Applied Health Science (OR 0.43; CI [0.19-0.96]), Pharmacy (OR 0.38; CI [0.17-0.87]), Nursing (OR 0.35; CI [0.16-0.78]), and Social Work (OR 0.30; CI [0.11-0.78]) reported lower perceived benefit. Compared to students in the College of Medicine, students in the College of Applied Health Sciences (OR 0.39; CI [0.17-0.94]), Dentistry (OR 0.27; CI [0.10-0.76]), Nursing (OR 0.38; CI [0.16-0.94]), and Social work (OR 0.31; CI [0.11-0.86]) reported more trustworthiness and more concerns about risk (OR 2.80; CI [1.15-6.81] for College of Applied Health Sciences, OR 9.12; CI [2.80-29.75] for Dentistry, OR 3.77; CI [1.47-9.65] for Nursing, OR 3.14; CI [1.02-9.67] for Social Work). Our findings suggest the need for a tailored vaccination strategy among different subgroups of health professional students.
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.