Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36542290›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2023

The Ethical Significance of Post-Vaccination COVID-19 Transmission Dynamics.

Steven R Kraaijeveld

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Should governments moralize health?Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. A Scalar Approach to Vaccination Ethics.The journal of ethics · 2024
    Article
  6. "The Danger of Words": Language Games in Bioethics.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2023
    Article
  7. Altruistic Vaccination: Insights from Two Focus Group Studies.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2022
    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

1 author.

Steven R KraaijeveldWageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands. steven.kraaijeveld@wur.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-6338-6305

Funding

ZonMw 522004004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The potential for vaccines to prevent the spread of infectious diseases is crucial for vaccination policy and ethics. In this paper, I discuss recent evidence that the current COVID-19 vaccines have only a modest and short-lived effect on reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission and argue that this has at least four important ethical implications. First, getting vaccinated against COVID-19 should be seen primarily as a self-protective choice for individuals. Second, moral condemnation of unvaccinated people for causing direct harm to others is unjustified. Third, the case for a harm-based moral obligation to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is weak. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, coercive COVID-19 vaccination policies (e.g., measures that exclude unvaccinated people from society) cannot be directly justified by the harm principle.

Indexed as

COVID-19CoercionCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansSARS-CoV-2VaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesCoercionCOVID-19 vaccinationMandatory vaccinationPublic health ethicsVaccination policyVaccine passports

Identifiers

PMID36542290
PMCPMC9768787

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.