ArticlePloS one2025
The survey of vaccination hesitancy among the residents in Jinan.
Article in PloS one, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVaccination is an important way to prevent disease, but vaccine hesitancy will impact vaccine coverage and indirectly affect health. This study aims to survey the status of vaccine hesitancy among adults in Jinan.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using the vaccine hesitancy scale among the parents of children and teenagers at hospitals in Jinan, China. We described the attitude of the parents to the vaccination through the dimensions of confidence (items: L1-L7) and the risk (items:L8-L10).The participants will be regarded as lacking confidence if the score is over 21 among the items (L1-L7), and participants will consider the vaccination to be a "Risk" if the score is over 9 among the items (L8-L10). Using the chi-square test to analyse the differences of attitude between different participants.
results202 individuals were enrolled, and most respondents (88.70%) agreed that vaccines are important for their child's health. 33.50% agreed and strongly agreed that new vaccines carried more risks than older vaccines. The average score for the lack of confidence in the vaccination was 11±0.25. The average score for risk for vaccination was 9.92±0.04. Participants aged below 30 years, females, those with lower education, and those without medical workers in the family were more concerned about the risks of vaccines.
conclusionsParticipants were confident about the vaccination. But they were also concerned about the risks of vaccines. A lack of vaccine knowledge may led the participants to have hesitancy about vaccinations.
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.