ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2023
A qualitative assessment of the adverse effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines: a study from Jordan.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the relationship between experience of vaccine adverse events and vaccine hesitancy: A scoping review.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe current study aimed to qualitatively explore the side effects reported by participants who received the COVID-19 vaccine among the Jordanian population.
methodsBetween April 18th and May 12th, 2022, an in-depth interview was conducted with a purposive sample of vaccinated individuals to assess the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine in this study. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes and sub-themes within the current qualitative data.
resultsA total of 20 participants were interviewed. They had a mean age of 41.3 (SD = 14.3) years. Half of the participants were females (n = 10, 50.0%). The study revealed six main themes: first, most of the respondents believed that COVID-19 vaccines were safe. Second, the vaccines are not equivalent in their safety. The third there showed that participants follow preventive measures to decrease the possibility of experiencing side effects. The fourth theme showed that reporting of side effects by the participants is dependent on the experienced side effects. Moreover, the next theme revealed that participants showed hesitancy to take more than one type of vaccine. Finally, participants were willing to take the vaccine annually, because they believed that the vaccine is better than the disease itself and decreases the aggressive effects of the disease.
conclusionsThis study found that the majority of participants believed in the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines and emphasized the responsibility of the healthcare providers in increasing awareness among the population about the importance of the vaccines. Enhancing such awareness is essential to improve the acceptance of receiving different types of vaccines.
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.