Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36187686›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Digital health literacy for COVID-19 vaccination and intention to be immunized: A cross sectional multi-country study among the general adult population.

Roy Rillera Marzo, Tin Tin Su, Roshidi Ismail, Mila Nu Nu Htay, Mohammad Yasir Essar, Shekhar Chauhan, Mark E Patalinghug, Burcu Kucuk Bicer, Titik Respati, Susan Fitriyana and 12 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors at 16 institutions in 12 countries.

Roy Rillera MarzoDepartment of Community Medicine, International Medical School, Management and Science University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Tin Tin SuGlobal Public Health, Jeffrey Cheah School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Monash University Malaysia, Bandar Sunway, Malaysia.
Roshidi IsmailSouth East Asia Community Observatory, Monash University Malaysia, Bandar Sunway, Malaysia.
Mila Nu Nu HtayDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Manipal University College Malaysia, Melaka, Malaysia.
Mohammad Yasir EssarDepartment of Dentistry, Kabul University of Medical Sciences, Kabul, Afghanistan.
Shekhar ChauhanDepartment of Family and Generations, International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, India.
Mark E PatalinghugSchool of Criminal Justice Education, J. H. Cerilles State College, Caridad, Philippines.
Burcu Kucuk BicerDepartment of Medical Education and Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
Titik RespatiFaculty of Medicine, Universitas Islam Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia.
Susan FitriyanaFaculty of Medicine, Universitas Islam Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia.
Wegdan BaniissaCollege of Health Sciences/Nursing Department, Sharjah Institute of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
Masoud LotfizadehDepartment of Community Health, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran.
Farzana RahmanAdministration and Research, Bangladesh National Nutrition Council, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Zahir Rayhan SalimCollege of Business Administration, International University of Business Agriculture and Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Edlaine Faria de Moura VillelaPublic Policies, Education and Communication, Disease Control Coordination, São Paulo State Health Department, São Paulo, Brazil.
Kittisak JermsittiparsertFaculty of Education, University of City Island, Famagusta, Cyprus.
Yadanar AungMedical Statistics Division, Department of Medical Research, Ministry of Health, Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar.
Nouran Ameen Elsayed HamzaMedical Agency for Research and Statistics, Giza, Egypt.
Petra HeidlerDepartment for Economy and Health, University for Continuing Education Krems, Danube University Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria.
Michael G HeadClinical Informatics Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Ken BrackstoneClinical Informatics Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Yulan LinDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Bandung Islamic University · IDMonash University Malaysia · MYUniversity of Southampton · GBFujian Medical University · CNGazi University · TRInternational Institute for Population Sciences · INInternational Medical University · MYInternational University of Business Agriculture and Technology · BDKabul University · AFManipal University College Malaysia · MYMinistry of Health and Family Welfare · BDMinistry of Health and Sports · MMPoliteknik STIA LAN JakartaShahrekord University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversität für Weiterbildung Krems · ATUniversity of Sharjah · AE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: It is clear that medical science has advanced much in the past few decades with the development of vaccines and this is even true for the novel coronavirus outbreak. By late 2020, COVID-19 vaccines were starting to be approved by national and global regulators, and across 2021, there was a global rollout of several vaccines. Despite rolling out vaccination programs successfully, there has been a cause of concern regarding uptake of vaccine due to vaccine hesitancy. In tackling the vaccine hesitancy and improving the overall vaccination rates, digital health literacy (DHL) could play a major role. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the digital health literacy and its relevance to the COVID-19 vaccination. Methods: An internet-based cross-sectional survey was conducted from April to August 2021 using convenience sampling among people from different countries. Participants were asked about their level of intention to the COVID-19 vaccine. Participants completed the Digital Health Literacy Instrument (DHLI), which was adapted in the context of the COVID Health Literacy Network. Cross-tabulation and logistic regression were used for analysis purpose. Results: Overall, the mean DHL score was 35.1 (SD = 6.9, Range = 12-48). The mean DHL score for those who answered "Yes" for "support for national vaccination schedule" was 36.1 (SD 6.7) compared to 32.5 (SD 6.8) for those who either answered "No" or "Don't know". Factors including country, place of residence, education, employment, and income were associated with the intention for vaccination. Odds of vaccine intention were higher in urban respondents (OR-1.46; C.I.-1.30-1.64) than in rural respondents. Further, higher competency in assessing the relevance of online information resulted in significantly higher intention for vaccine uptake. Conclusion: Priority should be given to improving DHL and vaccination awareness programs targeting rural areas, lower education level, lower income, and unemployed groups.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health LiteracyVaccinesAdultCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIntentionVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesCOVID-19digitalhealth literacymulti-countryvaccine intention

Identifiers

PMID36187686
PMCPMC9523876
OpenAlexW4296044370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.