Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36399454›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Assessment of COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers in Iraq; adverse effects and hesitancy.

Omeed Darweesh, Nasir Khatab, Ramiar Kheder, Thulfiqar Mohammed, Tola Faraj, Sabah Ali, Muath Ameen, Azad Kamal-Aldin, Mohammed Alswes, Naif Al-Jomah

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Omeed DarweeshCollege of Pharmacy, Al-Kitab University, Kirkuk, Iraq.
Nasir KhatabCollege of Pharmacy, Al-Kitab University, Kirkuk, Iraq.ORCID 0000-0002-0974-6277
Ramiar KhederMedical Laboratory Science Department, College of Science, University of Raparin, Sulaymaniyah, Iraq.
Thulfiqar MohammedNational Institute of Technology, Sulaymaniyah, Iraq.
Tola FarajDepartment of Medical Analysis, Faculty of Applied Science, Tishk International University, Erbil, Iraq.
Sabah AliDepartment of Public Health, Kirkuk Health Directorate, Ministry of Health, Kirkuk, Iraq.
Muath AmeenCollege of Pharmacy, Knowledge University, Erbil, Iraq.
Azad Kamal-AldinDepartment of Public Health, Kirkuk Health Directorate, Ministry of Health, Kirkuk, Iraq.
Mohammed AlswesDepartment of Family Medicine and Policlinics, Research Centre, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Naif Al-JomahMolecular Oncology Department, Research Centre, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-6653-2403
University of Kirkuk · IQKing Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre · SAHawler Medical University · IQUniversity of Raparin · IQ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines are available to the global population as of 2022. The acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine will play a key role in combating the worldwide pandemic. Public confidence in this vaccine is largely based on its safety and effectiveness. This study was designed to provide independent evidence of the adverse effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers in Iraq and to identify the attitudes of healthcare workers who rejected the vaccination. We conducted a cross-sectional study to collect data on the adverse effects of the Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Sinopharm vaccines. Data were collected between October 2021 and February 2022. A total of 2,202 participants were enrolled in the study: (89.97%) received injections of the COVID-19 vaccines and (10.03%) were hesitant to receive the vaccination. Participants received either the Pfizer vaccine (62.9%), AstraZeneca vaccine (23.5%) or Sinopharm vaccine (13.6%). Most adverse effects were significantly less prevalent in the second dose than in the first dose. Notably, the adverse effects associated with the Pfizer vaccine were significantly more prevalent in females than in males. Following the first dose, the participants experienced more adverse effects with the AstraZeneca vaccine. Following the second dose, more adverse effects were associated with the Pfizer vaccine. Interestingly, the prevalence of COVID-19 infection in participants who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine was significantly reduced compared to those who received two doses of either the AstraZeneca or Sinopharm vaccines. According to vaccine-hesitated participants, insufficient knowledge (29.9%), expeditious development (27.6%) and lack of trust in the vaccines (27.1%) were the three major reasons for refusing the vaccines. The results of our study indicated that these adverse effects do not present a significant problem and should not prevent successful control of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelHumansIraqMalePandemicsSurveys and QuestionnairesVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccines

Identifiers

PMID36399454
PMCPMC9674125
OpenAlexW4309307325

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.