Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39772043›Full record

ArticleVaccines2024

Post-Pandemic Perspectives: Willingness, Risk Perception and Factors Influencing COVID-19 Booster Vaccine Uptake Among Thai Healthcare Workers and Vulnerable Populations.

Amornphat Kitro, Wachiranun Sirikul, Chanachai Polpitakchai, Jinjuta Panumasvivat, Ranchana Yamsiri, Pacharee Tasena, Chutima Punyaphab, Chaiy Rungsiyakull, Ratana Sapbamrer, Penprapa Siviroj and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors.

Amornphat KitroDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4435-8090
Wachiranun SirikulDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-9183-4582
Chanachai PolpitakchaiDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Jinjuta PanumasvivatDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-0479-4923
Ranchana YamsiriDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Pacharee TasenaHealth Promotion Unit, Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Chutima PunyaphabHealth Promotion Unit, Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Chaiy RungsiyakullDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-6691-5428
Ratana SapbamrerDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-0379-2798
Penprapa SivirojDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4781-4119
Kriengkrai SrithanaviboonchaiDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-1683-4259

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe emergence of new COVID-19 variants continues to affect healthcare workers (HCWs) and vulnerable populations in the post-pandemic era. This study aims to assess the willingness, perceptions, and factors associated with booster COVID-19 vaccine uptake in this context.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted between October 2023 and May 2024 among Thai adults (>20 years old) in Chiang Mai, Northern Thailand. Participants included HCWs and patients with chronic medical conditions. People who had received a monovalent XBB-derived booster vaccine were excluded.

resultsData related to a total of 811 participants were analyzed, with 328 from the vulnerable group and 483 HCWs. Willingness to receive the booster was similar in both groups (43.3% in HCWs, 45.0% in the vulnerable group). Low-risk perception (59.6%-83.5%), minimal impact on daily life (60.4%-62.9%), and doubts about booster efficacy (75.9%-81.4%) were prevalent negative thoughts toward the booster. Having received a flu vaccine (aOR 2.1), concerns about the impact on life of COVID-19 (aOR 1.8), and beliefs in booster safety (aOR 1.8) and vaccine effectiveness against severe disease (aOR 2.7) were associated with increased willingness.

conclusionsOnly 44% of participants were willing to receive a COVID-19 booster. Policymakers can use these insights to develop strategies to increase vaccine uptake in the post-pandemic era.

Indexed as

COVID-19 vaccine post-pandemichealthcare workershigh-risk groupsrisk perceptionThailand

Identifiers

PMID39772043
PMCPMC11680416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.