ArticleEpidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil2025
Vaccine hesitancy among primary care health workers in Campo Grande, after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vaccine hesitancy in Brazil: post-pandemic challenges and the use of artificial intelligence.Revista de saude publica · 2026Article
- Vaccine hesitancy among healthcare professionals: factors associated with continuity of the COVID-19 vaccination schedule.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2026Article
- Epidemiology and health surveillance: synergies and challenges in a changing world.Revista brasileira de epidemiologia = Brazilian journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze vaccine hesitancy among primary care health workers, including the factors associated with it.
methodsCross-sectional descriptive study carried out between November 2022 and August 2023 in the city of Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, through the application of a questionnaire on vaccine hesitancy proposed by the World Health Organization. The association of vaccine hesitancy with sociodemographic variables and workers' perceptions was verified by bivariate analysis and multiple variables.
resultsVaccine hesitancy was observed in 32.7% of respondents, with a higher frequency after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (64.9%). The coronavirus-19 vaccine had the highest frequency of hesitation (68.4%). Doctors and nurses were the least hesitant, while community workers were the most hesitant. Believing that there are reasons for people not to get vaccinated was associated with vaccine hesitancy (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.01; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 1.60; 5.71). On the other hand, receiving institutional guidance to get vaccinated (OR 0.30; 95%CI 0.11; 0.78) and believing that hesitation affects the population's vaccination coverage (OR 0.46; 95%CI 0.25; 0.83) were factors associated with low hesitation frequency.
conclusionVaccine hesitancy was common among primary care professionals. The COVID-19 pandemic and the infodemic that followed it appear to have contributed to this scenery. The need for interventions aimed at these workers is highlighted, in order to impact vaccination coverage of the general population.
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.