ArticleJournal of community health2025
Vaccine Beliefs Among Uninsured People Receiving Care at Free Clinics.
Article in Journal of community health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMisinformation and vaccination hesitancy contribute to disparities in vaccination rates, particularly in under-resourced communities. This study aims to investigate perceptions and factors influencing vaccination decisions at free clinics serving diverse, under-resourced communities.
methodsSurveys were conducted across eight free clinics in the Greater Sacramento area, targeting uninsured or underinsured individuals. Information on demographics, sources of vaccine information, access to vaccines, vaccine perceptions, and vaccination decisions as pertaining to influenza and COVID-19 were collected on Qualtrics software. Chi-square and t-tests were used to analyze associations between demographics and vaccination rates.
resultsAmong 109 participants (24-82 years old), vaccination rates were found to be higher than the county average, with notable demographic variations. Contrary to initial hypotheses, men had higher vaccination rates than women, and recent immigrants exhibited higher vaccination rates than more long-term U.S. residents. A higher number of participants regarded the COVID-19 vaccine as effective than as safe, while the reverse was true for the influenza vaccine. Healthcare providers were the most trusted and influential sources for vaccine information, followed by government agencies, and then family and friends. Answers to hypothetical vaccine scenarios elicited assessments on risks and benefits.
conclusionThe study provides insight into the dynamics of vaccine hesitancy and factors that play into the decision-making process in under-resourced communities, underscoring the role of trust in healthcare providers. These findings are vital for tailoring community outreach strategies to create trust, address barriers, and enhance vaccine uptake within free community clinics.
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.