Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41064998›Full record

ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2025

"Same principles, different decisions": A qualitative study exploring the attitudes of COVID-19 vaccination among school staff in Switzerland.

Marta Fadda, Guenda Bernegger, Kleona Bezani, Ilaria Falvo, L Suzanne Suggs, Maria Caiata-Zufferey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Marta FaddaInstitute of Public Health, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3537-0346
Guenda BerneggerDepartment of Business Economics, Health and Social Care, University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, Manno, Switzerland.
Kleona BezaniInstitute of Public Health, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
Ilaria FalvoInstitute of Public Health, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
L Suzanne SuggsInstitute of Communication and Public Policy, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.
Maria Caiata-ZuffereyDepartment of Business Economics, Health and Social Care, University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, Manno, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Switzerland prioritized vaccination for school staff to mitigate the economic and societal impacts of school closures. However, there is limited research on vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among school staff in Switzerland. This study aimed to explore the arguments used by school staff to justify COVID-19 vaccination decisions in public and private institutions across Switzerland's German-, French-, and Italian-speaking regions. Participants were recruited using purposive sampling from a national survey and through snowball techniques. Data were collected from interviews with 47 participants employed in nurseries, kindergartens, primary schools, middle schools, and special education facilities, conducted between November 2021 and March 2022. Interviews were analyzed using a primarily inductive approach, complemented by elements of abductive and deductive reasoning to identify key principles guiding decision-making. Among the participants, 36 had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, while 11 remained unvaccinated. We extracted four main themes: respondents considered four principles (i.e. self-protection, protection of others, return to normality, and institutional loyalty) as starting points in their decision-making process and then developed different arguments, either in support or against vaccination. The findings illustrate the complexity of vaccine hesitancy within the school context, where individual decisions are shaped by a combination of rational, moral, political and identity-related factors. This study contributes to the theoretical understanding of vaccination decision-making processes, particularly in school settings. It highlights the importance of considering vaccine hesitancy in the workplace and underscores the need for tailored communication strategies that address specific concerns within professional groups.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesSchoolsVaccinationVaccination HesitancyAdultDecision MakingFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerlandCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19decision-makinghesitancyprofessional contextqualitativeschool staffSwitzerlandteachersvaccination

Identifiers

PMID41064998
PMCPMC12520101

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.