Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36366407›Full record

ReviewVaccines2022

Employee Participation in Workplace Vaccination Campaigns: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Maria Rosaria Gualano, Paolo Emilio Santoro, Ivan Borrelli, Maria Francesca Rossi, Carlotta Amantea, Antonio Tumminello, Alessandra Daniele, Flavia Beccia, Umberto Moscato

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Vaccination Open Day: A Cross-Sectional Study on the 2023 Experience in Lombardy Region, Italy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Pandemic Preparedness among Big Energy Companies: Call to Research and Action.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maria Rosaria GualanoSchool of Medicine, Saint Camillus International University of Health Sciences, UniCamillus, 00131 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7357-2892
Paolo Emilio SantoroDepartment of Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6052-088X
Ivan BorrelliDepartment of Health Science and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6361-8823
Maria Francesca RossiSection of Occupational Health, Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0901-7864
Carlotta AmanteaSection of Occupational Health, Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5795-6316
Antonio TumminelloSection of Occupational Health, Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Alessandra DanieleSection of Occupational Health, Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0658-8154
Flavia BecciaSection of Hygiene, Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9278-7995
Umberto MoscatoDepartment of Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2568-3966
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To reduce vaccine-preventable diseases in workers, workplace vaccination campaigns can be implemented on-site. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate adherence to workplace vaccination campaigns. Three databases, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus, were screened systematically for articles in English or Italian addressing participation in an on-site vaccination program by employees. The following data was extracted: authors, year, country, type of vaccine, type of workplace, sample size, vaccination rate. Data on the prevalence of flu vaccination were calculated and pooled using a random-effects model. Thirteen articles were included in the review, ten in the meta-analysis. Most studies were conducted in the USA (30.7%) and most vaccination campaigns were against influenza (69.2%), with a pooled estimate of 42% (95% CI: 0.25-0.60%); participation rate was highly variable, ranging from 88.9% for an influenza vaccination campaign to 5.7% for a Lyme disease vaccination campaign. Offering free on-site vaccination can be a successful tool to ensure adherence to vaccination campaigns and administration of all required doses according to the vaccine administration scheme. The occupational physician can play a key role in implementing workplace campaigns for employee mandatory vaccinations.

Indexed as

disease preventionoccupational medicinevaccine acceptancevaccine hesitancyworkplace vaccination campaignworksite wellness

Identifiers

PMID36366407
PMCPMC9698273
OpenAlexW4308770972

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.