ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2024
A cross-sectional study on the understanding and attitudes toward influenza and influenza vaccines among different occupational groups in China.
Article 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictors affecting vaccine hesitancy towards annual COVID-19 booster shots among populations from different countries.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Exploring influenza vaccination coverage and barriers to influenza vaccine uptake among preschool children in Fuzhou in 2022: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the level of knowledge regarding influenza viruses and vaccines among different professional groups to investigate the reasons for vaccine hesitancy. We collected 2190 questionnaires regarding influenza vaccines in China in 2022. The respondents were categorized into the general population (GP), foreign affairs workforce population (FAWP), and veterinary workforce population (VWP) according to their job positions. Linear regression was used to assess the association between multiple factors and influenza vaccination rates. The association between work and influenza vaccination rates was also assessed by grouping different workforce populations. The vaccination rate of the GP was higher than that of the VWP (odds ratio: 1.342, 95% confidence interval: 1.025-1.853), surpassing the rates reported in previous studies. This may be attributed to heightened concerns about infectious diseases influenced by the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Despite the VWP's more in-depth knowledge of the VWP on zoonotic diseases and their recognition of their importance, there was no significant difference in influenza knowledge among the three populations. This discrepancy contrasts with the observed differences in vaccination rates. Further investigation revealed that, compared with FAWP, the price of vaccines emerged as a primary influencing factor for vaccination rates (odds ratio:0.398, 95%CI; 0.280-0.564). General concerns regarding the protective effects and side effects of vaccines were also noted.
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.