Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37450312›Full record

ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2023

Acceptability for the influenza virus vector COVID-19 vaccine for intranasal spray: A cross-sectional survey in Beijing, China.

Yuan Ma, Juan Li, Yanlin Cao, Wei Li, Rujing Shi, Bin Jia, Haihong Wang, Le Yan, Luodan Suo, Weizhong Yang and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Yuan MaSchool of Population Medicine and Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Juan LiBeijing Center for Disease Prevention and Control, Beijing Research Center for Preventive Medicine, Beijing, China.
Yanlin CaoSchool of Population Medicine and Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Wei LiCenter for Applied Statistics and School of Statistics, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China.
Rujing ShiDepartment of programmed immunization, Haidian District Center for Diseases Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Bin JiaDepartment of programmed immunization, Chaoyang District Center for Diseases Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Haihong WangDepartment of programmed immunization, Changping District Center for Diseases Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Le YanDepartment of programmed immunization, Huairou District Center for Diseases Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Luodan SuoBeijing Center for Disease Prevention and Control, Beijing Research Center for Preventive Medicine, Beijing, China.
Weizhong YangSchool of Population Medicine and Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jiang WuBeijing Center for Disease Prevention and Control, Beijing Research Center for Preventive Medicine, Beijing, China.
Luzhao FengSchool of Population Medicine and Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5206-5995
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNBeijing Center for Disease Prevention and Control · CNTaiwan Centers for Disease Control · TWCapital University · USRenmin University of China · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The intranasal spray COVID-19 vaccine was made available for the first time in China, it is necessary to understand receivers' satisfaction and experience toward the vaccine to help optimize vaccination service. A self-administered multicenter cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted in Beijing, China, in December 2022. The vaccination experience was evaluated through three dimensions: immediate tolerance, smooth progress, and time-saving. Vaccine acceptability was measured by receivers' preference for the intranasal spray over intramuscular injection after vaccination and their recommendation willingness. Stepwise multinomial and binary logistic regression models were applied to investigate factors associated with vaccine acceptability. Among 10,452 participants included in the analysis, 92.6% felt no discomfort during the inoculation, 99.8% thought the vaccination process went well, and 89.4% deemed it a time-saving option. For vaccine acceptability, 5566 (53.3%) participants were willing to recommend the vaccine to others, 534 (5.1%) refused, and 4352 (41.6%) had not decided yet; 6142 (58.8%) participants preferred the intranasal spray, 873 (8.4%) preferred the intramuscular injection, and 3437 (32.9%) had no preferences. The most concerned aspects of the intranasal spray vaccine were vaccine effectiveness and safety. Receivers who perceived higher vaccine effectiveness or safety were more likely to recommend it to others (OR, 95%CI: 4.41, 3.24-6.00; 6.11, 4.52-8.27) or prefer it over intramuscular injection after vaccination (OR, 95%CI: 5.94, 4.62-7.65; 8.50, 6.70-10.78). Receivers showed good acceptability and experience toward the intranasal spray COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine effectiveness and safety were the most concerned aspects, and corresponding publicity and education efforts may help improve vaccine acceptability.

Indexed as

COVID-19Influenza VaccinesOrthomyxoviridaeBeijingChinaCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHumansVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesInfluenza VaccinesCOVID-19Intranasal spray vaccinerecommendation willingnessvaccine acceptabilityvaccine preference

Identifiers

PMID37450312
PMCPMC10351447
OpenAlexW4384338187

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.