Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39106971›Full record

SynthesisHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2024

Impact of COVID-19 on vaccine confidence and uptake: A systematic literature review.

Ivo Vojtek, Marloes van Wouw, Angus Thomson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Ivo VojtekGSK K.K, Japan Medical Affairs, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6986-4275
Marloes van WouwGSK, Global Medical Affairs, Wavre, Belgium.ORCID 0009-0007-8063-6859
Angus ThomsonIrimi Company, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5656-0902

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, scheduled vaccinations were postponed, mass vaccination programmes were suspended and opportunities for healthcare workers to administer vaccines ad hoc decreased. The aims of this systematic literature review were to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vaccine confidence, intent and uptake in preexisting routine childhood or adult vaccination programmes, and to identify factors associated with changes in acceptance, intent and uptake of preexisting vaccines. Medline and Embase were searched for studies in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Japan, the USA, and European countries, published between 1 January 2021 and 4 August 2022. A complementary gray literature search was conducted between 11 and 13 October 2022, and supplemented with additional gray research in October 2023. In total, 54 citations were included in the review. Study design and geography were heterogeneous. The number of adults who received or intended to receive an influenza or pneumococcal vaccine was higher during the pandemic than in previous seasons (

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultChildCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansImmunization ProgramsInfluenza VaccinesPandemicsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePneumococcal VaccinesSARS-CoV-2VaccinationVaccination HesitancyCOVID-19 VaccinesInfluenza VaccinesPneumococcal VaccinesCOVID-19influenza vaccinepneumococcal vaccinevaccine confidencevaccine hesitancyvaccine uptake

Identifiers

PMID39106971
PMCPMC11305033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.