ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2022
COVID-19 vaccine controversy: A cross-sectional analysis of factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance amongst emergency department patients in New York City.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 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.
- COVID-19 vaccine controversy: A cross-sectional analysis of factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance amongst emergency department patients in New York City.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Understanding variables associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine confidence and hesitancy may inform strategies to improve vaccine uptake in clinical settings such as the emergency department (ED). We aim to identify factors contributing to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and to assess patient attitudes surrounding offering COVID-19 vaccines in the ED. Methods: We conducted a survey of a convenience sample of patients and patient visitors over the age 18 years, who were native English or Spanish speakers. The survey was conducted from March through August 2021 at 3 EDs in New York City. The survey was administered via an electronic format, and participants provided verbal consent. Results: Our sample size was 377. Individuals with post-graduate degrees viewed vaccines positively (Prevalence Ratio [PR], 1.63; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 1.07-2.47). Of the various high-risk medical conditions associated with adverse COVID-19 infection outcomes, diabetes was the only condition associated with more positive views of vaccines (PR, 1.37; CI, 1.17-1.59). Of all participants, 71.21% stated that they believed offering a COVID-19 vaccine in the ED was a good idea. Of unvaccinated participants, 21.80% stated they would get vaccinated if it were offered to them in the ED. Conclusion: EDs can serve as a safety net for vulnerable populations and can act as an access point for vaccination.
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.