Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38375445›Full record

ArticleThe journal of ethics2024

A Scalar Approach to Vaccination Ethics.

Steven R Kraaijeveld, Rachel Gur-Arie, Euzebiusz Jamrozik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of ethics, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Scope and Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Workplace Vaccination Mandates During the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  3. Should governments moralize health?Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025
    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

3 authors.

Steven R KraaijeveldWageningen University & Research, Hollandseweg 1, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6338-6305
Rachel Gur-ArieEdson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, 550 N 3rd St., Phoenix, AZ 85004 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0868-7682
Euzebiusz JamrozikWellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Big Data Institute, University of Oxford, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5940-602X

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Should people get vaccinated for the sake of others? What could ground-and limit-the normative claim that people ought to do so? In this paper, we propose a reasons-based consequentialist account of vaccination for the benefit of others. We outline eight harm-based and probabilistic factors that, we argue, give people moral reasons to get vaccinated. Instead of understanding other-directed vaccination in terms of binary moral duties (i.e., where people either have or do not have a moral duty to get vaccinated), we develop a scalar approach according to which people can have stronger or weaker moral reasons to get vaccinated in view of the moral good of vaccination. One advantage of our approach is that it can capture why a person might have strong moral reasons to get vaccinated with Vaccine A, but only weak moral reasons to get vaccinated with Vaccine B. We discuss theoretical strengths of our approach and provide a case study of vaccination against COVID-19 to demonstrate its practical significance.

Indexed as

AltruismCOVID-19 vaccinationMoral reasonsPublic health ethicsScalar moralityVaccination ethics

Identifiers

PMID38375445
PMCPMC10874331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.