ArticlePloS one2025
The association between healthcare access and shingles vaccination among older adults in Virginia, United States.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Herpes Zoster in Aging Patients: Risk Factors and Prevention Strategies.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionShingles is a debilitating vaccine preventable disease that poses a health threat to older adults. However, the uptake of shingles vaccines remains low, and the factors contributing to the low uptake are not clearly understood. This study assessed the association between healthcare access and shingles vaccination among older adults, as well as the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on vaccine uptake.
methodsThis was a cross-sectional study among adults 50 + years in Virginia (n = 16,576) using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2018, 2019, and 2021). We calculated the prevalence of shingles vaccination by health insurance and access to primary health care provider (used as proxies for healthcare access) and in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic (pre vs during). Log binomial regression models were used to estimate prevalence ratios (PR), adjusting for confounders.
resultsShingles vaccination was substantially higher among those with healthcare access compared to those without. Specifically, shingles vaccination was 35% among those with health insurance vs. 10% among those without (adjusted PR (aPR): 2.03, 95% CI 1.44, 2.86), and 36% among those with a primary healthcare provider vs 15% among those without (aPR: 1.99, 95% CI: 1.65-2.41). Finally, shingles vaccination was 41% during the COVID-19 pandemic vs. 30% before (aPR:1.26, 95% CI: 1.20-1.33).
conclusionIndividuals with health insurance and access to a primary healthcare provider were significantly more likely to receive the shingles vaccine compared to those without such access. Moreover, the prevalence of shingles vaccination during the pandemic period was substantially higher compared with shingles vaccination before the pandemic.
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.