ArticleBMJ open2024
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- "As soon as it's trying to be persuasive, my skepticism kicks in": A qualitative study to co-design vaccine communication strategies with vaccine hesitant adults in Canada.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- A missed opportunity: faith leaders and the HPV vaccination effort in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Global health action · 2026Article
- Article
- Awareness of autism spectrum disorder among public primary school teachers in Iraq.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Messages dissemination regarding covid-19 by street posters: the case of the ultra-Orthodox community in Israel.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- A framework for handling uncertainty in a large-scale programme estimating the Global Burden of Animal Diseases.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study explored faith leaders' perspectives on the COVID-19 vaccine and their role in building COVID-19 vaccine trust in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
designA qualitative study with in-depth interviews and thematic analysis was conducted.
participantsTwenty-one faith leaders from the seven religious groups represented in the Inter-Religious Council of Ethiopia participated in the study.
settingThe study was conducted in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
resultsThe thematic analysis revealed three themes. First, faith leaders were aware of the risks of the COVID-19 pandemic, although most ascribed a spiritual meaning to the advent of the pandemic. The pandemic seriously affected the faith communities, inflicting financial losses. Second, faith leaders were essential allies during the pandemic by effectively collaborating with government and health professionals in COVID-19 prevention activities and public health interventions using spiritual reasoning. They were actively informing the community about the importance of the COVID-19 vaccine, where many faith leaders were publicly vaccinated to build trust in the vaccine and act as role models. Third, despite this, they faced multiple questions from the congregation about the vaccine, including rumours.
conclusionsThis research showed that faith leaders played crucial roles in encouraging vaccine use but were limited in their persuasion power because of intense rumours and misinformation. Empowering faith leaders with the latest vaccine evidence needs to be prioritised in the future.
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.