| Title |
COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance and Its Associated Factors Among the Iraqi Population: A Cross Sectional Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, February 2022
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s350917 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Walid Al-Qerem, Alaa Hammad, Alaa Hussein Alsajri, Shadan Waleed Al-Hishma, Jonathan Ling, Rami Mosleh |
| Abstract |
The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses a serious threat to countless lives. Development of an efficient vaccination can help end the pandemic. Vaccine hesitancy/refusal is a huge issue that could stymie attempts to combat the disease. The goal of this study is to examine COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Iraq where at the end of July 2021, only 7.4% of the population was vaccinated. This is a cross-sectional web-based study. A survey was used to assess knowledge, attitudes and practice (KAP) toward COVID-19. Willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 was assessed, with a logistic regression used to identify variables associated with vaccine acceptance. Motives for vaccination refusal/hesitation were reported. A total of 1542 participants (females = 56.7%) completed the questionnaire. Participants displayed high knowledge and good protective practices toward COVID-19 (median score = 15 out of 19 and 20 out of 25 respectively). 88.6% were willing to be vaccinated. Variables associated with vaccine acceptance included have not been infected with COVID-19 (OR=0.53, p=0.01), low- and moderate-income (ORs=0.42 and 0.63, p<0.01 respectively), low education level (OR=0.33, p-value<0.01) and perceived degree of vaccination importance (OR=1.30, P-value<0.01). The most mentioned reasons for vaccine refusal were concerns about vaccine safety and side effects (90.35%) and the need for more information about the vaccine (81.2%). Participants showed high acceptance toward COVID-19 vaccination, nevertheless more efforts should be applied to overcome barriers mentioned by the participants. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Researcher | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 28 | 52% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 29 | 54% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2023.
All research outputs
#8,541,797
of 25,392,582 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#641
of 1,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,511
of 517,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#16
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,758 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 517,864 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.