Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36457270›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2023

Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring change and complexity in COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow-up qualitative study.

Bridget Lockyer, Rachael H Moss, Charlotte Endacott, Shahid Islam, Laura Sheard, Bradford Institute for Health Research Covid-19 Scientific Advisory Group

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bridget LockyerBradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2195-5549
Rachael H MossBradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3015-7768
Charlotte EndacottBradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK.
Shahid IslamBradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK.
Laura SheardDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9241-8361
Bradford Institute for Health Research Covid-19 Scientific Advisory Group
Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of York · GB

Funding

Department of Health NIHR200166Medical Research Council MR/S037527/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT101597MA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 vaccines have been the central pillar of the public health response to the pandemic, intended to enable us to 'live with Covid'. It is important to understand change and complexity of COVID-19 vaccines attitudes and decisions to maximize uptake through an empathetic lens.

objectiveTo explore the factors that influenced people's COVID-19 vaccines decisions and how their complex attitudes towards the vaccines had changed in an eventful year. DESIGN AND

participantsThis is a follow-up study that took place in Bradford, UK between October 2021 and January 2022, 1 year after the original study. In-depth phone interviews were conducted with 12 (of the 20 originally interviewed) people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted.

resultsEleven of the 12 participants interviewed had received both doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and most intended to have a booster dose. Participants described a variety of reasons why they had decided to have the vaccines, including the following: feeling at increased risk at work; protecting family and others in their communities; unrestricted travel and being influenced by the vaccine decisions of family, friends and colleagues. All participants discussed ongoing interaction with COVID-19 misinformation and for some, this meant they were uneasy about their decision to have the vaccine. They described feeling overloaded by and disengaged from COVID-19 information, which they often found contradictory and some felt mistrustful of the UK Government's motives and decisions during the pandemic.

conclusionsThe majority of participants had managed to navigate an overwhelming amount of circulating COVID-19 misinformation and chosen to have two or more COVID-19 vaccines, even if they had been previously said they were unsure. However, these decisions were complicated, demonstrating the continuum of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance. This follow-up study underlines that vaccine attitudes are changeable and contextual. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The original study was developed through a rapid community and stakeholder engagement process in 2020. Discussion with the Bradford Council Public Health team and the public through the Bradford COVID-19 Community Insights Group was undertaken in 2021 to identify important priorities for this follow-up study.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesFollow-Up StudiesHumansPatient ComplianceUnited KingdomCOVID-19 VaccinesBradfordCOVID-19misinformationqualitativevaccine acceptancevaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID36457270
PMCPMC9854290
OpenAlexW4310597624

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.