ArticleVaccines2022
Insights on COVID-19 Vaccination in Portugal: A Qualitative Study among Health Professionals and Teachers.
Article in Vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perceptions, Knowledge, and Attitudes of General Population About Prostate Cancer-Associated Risk Factors: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies Focusing on Lifestyle.Current oncology reports · 2025Pooled it
- Informing future seasonal influenza and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns based on past experience: a mixed-method approach with eligible populations and healthcare professionals.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Unmasking vaccine hesitancy and refusal: a deep dive into Anti-vaxxer perspectives on COVID-19 in Spain.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Correlation of geopolitics, education, democracy with COVID-19 vaccination rate.BMC public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVaccination against COVID-19 has had a major impact over the course of the pandemic, leading to a reduced number of hospitalizations and deaths. However, the mass vaccination process has been accompanied by skepticism and hesitancy since its beginning. As health professionals and teachers are important public health actors who can strongly intervene to reduce vaccination hesitancy among their patients and students, respectively, this study aimed to assess their main perceptions towards COVID-19 vaccination.
methodsTwo focus group sessions, one with health professionals and the other with teachers, were conducted according to the COREQ checklist. Qualitative data were analyzed through theoretical thematic analysis.
resultsIn general, none of the groups showed vaccine hesitancy, although both groups had concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of the vaccines. The main concerns of health professionals were mostly related to the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, while teachers were more worried about the lack of access to reliable information about the COVID-19 vaccination.
conclusionsIt is plausible to conclude that it is imperative to provide clear and accurate information for the population in order to avoid vaccination hesitancy.
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.