ArticlePLOS mental health2024
COVID-19 vaccine attitudes among mental health professionals in the WHO's global clinical practice network.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although COVID-19 vaccines have demonstrated efficacy, there is variability in health professionals' attitudes towards these agents. Factors associated with mental health professionals' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination are not well understood. We investigated these factors by administering a newly developed measure, the COVID-19 Vaccine Attitudes Questionnaire (C-VAQ), to members of the World Health Organization's Global Clinical Practice Network (GCPN) of mental health professionals. 1,931 GCPN members representing all world regions participated between July 28 and September 7, 2021. Mental health professionals' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination were assessed in one of five languages (Chinese, English, French, Japanese, Russian, or Spanish) using the C-VAQ. Internal consistency, factor structure, and predictive validity of the C-VAQ were examined, and a multiple-linear regression model was employed to assess C-VAQ score predictors, including sociodemographic variables (age, gender, WHO region, country income level, profession, and years of professional experience) as well as country mortality rate and the stringency of each country's response to COVID-19. The C-VAQ demonstrated good internal consistency and external validity. Items loaded on to a single factor. Having received a COVID-19 vaccine, higher country mortality rate, and higher stringency index was significantly associated with more positive vaccine attitudes. Lower age, residing in a low-and-middle income country, and living in Asia were all was significantly associated with less positive vaccine attitudes. The C-VAQ scores were negatively correlated with the number of concerns about the COVID-19 vaccination. The C-VAQ was useful in demonstrating the extent to which additional work is needed to improve mental health professionals' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines globally. Relatively poorer attitudes toward vaccination among some mental health clinicians around the world suggests the need for broad, multi-pronged interventions.
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.