Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36684929›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Comparison of vaccine hesitancy during the low and high points of COVID-19 in a population under international sanctions: A longitudinal mixed-methods study in Iran.

Hamidreza Khankeh, Mohammad Pourebrahimi, Mohammadjavad Hosseinabadi-Farahani, Mehrdad Farrokhi, Mohammad Saeed Khanjani, Javad Shojafard, Arya Hamedanchi, Maryam Ranjbar, Mariye Jenabi Ghods, Shokoufeh Ahmadi and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. COVID-19 and Biopolitics: An Essay on Iran.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2023
    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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hamidreza KhankehHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad PourebrahimiNursing Faculty, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammadjavad Hosseinabadi-FarahaniDepartment of Nursing, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mehrdad FarrokhiHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad Saeed KhanjaniDepartment of Counseling, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Javad ShojafardHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Arya HamedanchiIranian Research Center on Aging, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Maryam RanjbarHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mariye Jenabi GhodsMaster of Psychiatric Nursing, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Shokoufeh AhmadiHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Elham GhanaatpishehHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad SaatchiHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences · IRBaqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Along with the challenges of COVID-19 vaccine supply in low-income countries, vaccine hesitancy was another problem for the health system. The aim of this study was to deeply understand the challenges of vaccine acceptance, the vaccination process, and to compare the affecting vaccine acceptance in the high and low points of the epidemic in Iran. Methods: In the qualitative part of this mixed-methods study, content analysis was used to investigate experiences and perceptions about COVID-19 vaccination in four groups. In the quantitative study, in March 2021 (low point), and on August 1, 2021 (high point), two population-based cross-sectional studies were performed in Tehran and its rural, with sample sizes of 1,200 and 1,872 people aged over 18 years, respectively. Multinomial (polytomous) logistic regression was used to determine the factors affecting hesitation and unwillingness to receive the vaccine. Results: Disbelief in vaccine safety, vaccine distrust, ignorance and confusion, and inadequate facilities were the common reasons extracted in the two qualitative studies. At the low and high points of the epidemic, vaccine acceptance was 83.6% (95% CI: 81.3-85.9) and 65.8% (95% CI: 65.8-71.0), respectively. Residence in rural areas, (Odds Ratio: 0.44, Discussion: Counter-intuitively, acceptance did not increase at the peak of epidemic. The presence of obstacles, such as increased distrust in the effectiveness of vaccines due to the occurrence of multiple peaks in different vaccinated countries, as well as the influence of the media, anti-vaccine campaigns, and lack of proper communication about risks caused more hesitation. More investigation to understand how people accept or reject vaccine and its long term consequences is recommended.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIranMiddle AgedVaccination HesitancyCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19 vaccinesIranSARS-CoV-2vaccination hesitancyvaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID36684929
PMCPMC9850560
OpenAlexW4313535355

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.