ArticleDigital health
How cyberchondria and decision self-efficacy shapes the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccine: A gender-based comparison.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trends in the Implementation of the Cyberchondria Severity Scale: Bibliometric Analysis.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Alarmingly, the individuals' reach and coverage to get vaccinated in developing regions during the pandemic is a massive challenge for concerned authorities. This study aimed to demonstrate how cyberchondria play a significant role in a classical health belief model. Cyberchondria may influence cognitive factors (e.g. self-efficacy), which may contribute to an increase in attitude-behavior gap. Especially in the context of a health-centric scenario, it may discourage individuals to take protective measures. Method: By using the cross-sectional research design, the authors conducted a quantitative survey in Pakistan and collected 563 responses from 303 male respondents (rural = 91; urban = 212) with (Urban M:35.5, standard deviation (SD):13.4) and rural M:37.5, SD:8.4). Result: The findings indicate that decision self-efficacy among males is stronger than that in females. It dominates other determinants, which can dampen the individuals' intentions to get vaccinated. For instance, the effect of conspiracies and perceived seriousness was noted nonsignificant and weak. In females, perceived seriousness was stronger determinant than in males. In addition, the negative effect of decision self-efficacy was noted in the case of females, and conspiracy and cyberchondria had a negative role. Conclusion: This study highlights valuable implications for future research in infodemic, health communication and health literacy, and practical implications for regulatory bodies and public administration.
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.