ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Understanding the vaccine hesitancy of COVID-19 in Benin.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Longitudinal study on changes in COVID-19 vaccination intentions in Benin and Senegal: Insights from Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE).Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 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
Vaccination campaigns against COVID-19 have been set up in all countries. The aim was to reach a sufficient vaccination threshold to ensure herd immunity. In Benin, the objective was to achieve 60% coverage. However, coverage was only 35% in May 2022. People were reluctant to be vaccinated. We had set up a population-based study to investigate these barriers to vaccination. Our approach was qualitative (80 semi-structured interviews with vaccinated and non-vaccinated people) and quantitative (179 questionnaires with CHWs (Community Health Workers) in urban and rural areas. To analyse the qualitative data, thematic sorting was carried out, while the statistical analysis of the data was carried out using SPSS and Excel software. Perceptions and concerns about COVID-19 revealed widespread mistrust of the disease and vaccination. Part of the population doubted the existence or seriousness of the disease, with over 70% of CHWs reporting that people did not perceive the reality of the disease in their daily lives. These doubts were reinforced by the limited impact of the disease and political interpretations of the pandemic, often viewed as a tool for state control. Mistrust of vaccines was even more pronounced, with over 90% of CHWs indicating that people were concerned about the novelty of vaccines and doubts their effectiveness. Rumours circulating on social networks amplified these concerns, fuelling fears about vaccine safety. Fear of stigmatisation, forced isolation and the impossibility of carrying out traditional funeral rituals heightened people's reluctance. The requirement to sign a consent form absolving the state of responsibility for side-effects further deepened these suspicions. Our study confirmed a strong reluctance to vaccinate against COVID-19. It highlighted the critical role of media and social networks and the necessity for authorities to address these factors in communication diseases to ensure efficient disease control.
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.