ArticleVaccines2023
Factors Influencing the Healthcare Workers' Willingness to Receive the COVID-19 Booster Dose in Tuscany (Italy).
Article in Vaccines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emergency Medical Services Clinicians and COVID-19 Booster Behavior-A Cross-Sectional National Evaluation.Vaccines · 2025Article
- COVID-19 in Morocco: Nurses' Knowledge of Anti-COVID-19 Vaccines and Their Involvement in Vaccine Vigilance.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- A Greek Nationwide Survey About Sources of Information on Seasonal Influenza and COVID-19 Vaccination Used by Healthcare Facility Staff During the Pandemic.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Anti-COVID-19 Vaccination in the Italian General Population: Proactive Clinical Risk Analysis Using Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis Technique.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Vaccine Hesitancy and Associated Factors Amongst Health Professionals: A Scoping Review of the Published Literature.Vaccines · 2024Article
- Article
- 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe World Health Organization has defined vaccine hesitancy as behavior influenced by several factors, including trust in the vaccine itself or its provider or the perceived need for vaccination. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors influencing the willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among the employees and healthcare professionals of the Central Tuscany Local Health Authority (CT-LHA) in Italy.
methodsFrom July to October 2022, a cross-sectional study was conducted. An online questionnaire was administered to 7000 employees of the CT-LHA. The questionnaire analyzed the factors that influenced receiving the booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. The sample was stratified by gender, age, type of occupation (healthcare or non-healthcare workers), and seniority. Incomplete questionnaires were excluded. A chi-squared test was performed through STATA. The significance level was set at 95%.
resultsOf the questionnaires administered, 1885 (26.9%) questionnaires were eligible for the study. In the previous vaccination campaign, the healthcare workers (HCWs) considered the vaccine used by CT-LHA as safe, in contrast to non-healthcare workers (N-HCWs), who considered it less secure (
conclusionsThe factors studied appear to influence HCWs differently from N-HCWs. Both HCWs and N-HCWs would choose an upgraded mRNA vaccine for the booster dose.
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.