Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36579319›Full record

ArticleHealth and human rights2022

"No Jab, No Entry": A Constitutional and Human Rights Perspective on Vaccine Mandates in Ghana.

Maame Efua Addadzi-Koom

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and human rights, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Maame Efua Addadzi-KoomA lecturer in the Public Law Department at the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As part of global efforts to reach herd immunity to stem the spread of COVID-19, the government of Ghana in 2021 declared December as the month of vaccination. Along with the declaration were statements about the government's intention to make vaccination mandatory in January 2022 for select groups of persons and to restrict access of unvaccinated persons to certain public spaces. The directives attracted varied reactions since they touched on constitutionally guaranteed fundamental human rights. Later, in March 2022, the president eased some restrictions, such as mask wearing and social distancing at public events but subject to all users being fully vaccinated. This paper analyzes the constitutional and human rights implications of a vaccine mandate in Ghana. It answers the question, Is mandatory vaccination necessary and appropriate given the COVID-19 situation in Ghana? I make a case for finding a reasonable balance between the personal liberties of Ghanaians and the state's responsibility to protect public health. Using the proportionality test, I argue that while mandatory vaccination is permissible within Ghana's legal and constitutional framework, a tiered approach is preferable.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesGhanaHuman RightsHumansPublic HealthVaccines

Identifiers

PMID36579319
PMCPMC9790959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.