ArticlePloS one2024
Cross-sectional survey evaluating the psychological impact of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in patients with cancer: The VACCINATE study.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted on cancer patients' psychological well-being and clinical status. We assessed the levels of anxiety, depression, and distress and the attitude towards COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients, accepting vaccination at the Verona University Hospital and Camposampiero Hospital in the Veneto region. Self-reported questionnaires were administered to patients undergoing COVID-19 vaccination between March and May 2021 (first and second dose). Twenty-seven items were investigated: i) demographics/clinical characteristics; ii) anxiety, depression, and distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-HADS-and Distress Thermometer-DT); iii) four specific items regarding awareness about infection risks, interference with anticancer treatments, and vaccine side effects. Sixty-two and 57% of the patients who accepted to be vaccinated responded to the survey in the two participating Hospitals, respectively. Mean age was 63 years (SD: 12 years; range 19-94 years), women were slightly more prevalent (57.6%), most participants were married (70%), and either worker or retired (60%). Borderline and clinical levels of anxiety were recorded in 14% and 10% of respondents; borderline and clinical levels of depression in 14% and 8%; and moderate and severe distress levels in 33% and 9%. Overall, there was high confidence that vaccination would reduce the risk of contracting COVID-19 (70%), which would make patients feel less worried about contracting the infection (60%). Fear that vaccine-related side effects would interfere with anticancer treatment and/or global health status was low (10% and 9% for items 3 and 4, respectively) and significantly associated with baseline levels of anxiety, depression, and distress at multivariate analysis. Results did not differ between the Verona and Camposampiero cohorts. During the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, adult cancer patients demonstrated high levels of confidence towards vaccination; baseline levels of anxiety, depression, and distress were the only significant predictors of reduced confidence.
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.