MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4364321201 · doi:10.2196/41925

Belief in COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories, Level of Trust in Government Information, and Willingness to Take COVID-19 Vaccines Among Health Care Workers in Nigeria: Survey Study

2023· article· en· W4364321201 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sunday Oluwafemi Oyeyemi, Stephen Fagbemi, Ismaila Iyanda Busari, Rolf Wynn

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Health carePandemicFamily medicineMedicinePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recently declared vaccine hesitancy or refusal as a threat to global health. COVID-19 vaccines have been proven efficacious and are central to combatting the pandemic. However, many-including skilled health care workers (HCWs)-have been hesitant in taking the vaccines. Conspiracy theories spread on social media may play a central role in fueling vaccine hesitancy. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate HCWs' belief in COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy theories (ie, that the vaccines can alter one's DNA or genetic information and that the vaccines contain microchips) and trust in government information on COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: Health care workers in Ondo State, Nigeria, representing different health care professions were asked to participate anonymously in an online survey. The participants were asked about their beliefs in 2 viral conspiracy theories and their trust in government information on COVID-19 vaccines. We used multivariable logistic regressions to investigate the relationships between trust in government information on COVID-19 vaccines and (1) belief in DNA alteration, (2) belief in microchip implantation through the vaccine, and (3) willingness to accept the vaccine. RESULTS: A total of 557 HCWs (n=156, 28% men and n=395, 70.9% women) were included in the study. A total of 26.4% (n=147) of the sampled HCWs believed COVID-19 vaccines contained digital microchips, while 30% (n=167) believed the vaccines could alter one's DNA or genetic information. The beliefs varied according to professional group, with 45.8% (55/120) and 50% (5/10) of nurses and pharmacists, respectively, believing in the DNA alteration theory and 33.3% (40/120) and 37.5% (6/16) of the nurses and laboratory scientists, respectively, believing in the microchip theory. Social media was an important source of COVID-19 information for 45.4% (253/557) of HCWs. A total of 76.2% (419/550) of the participants expressed a willingness to take the vaccine. The odds of HCWs believing that COVID-19 vaccines contained digital microchips increased significantly with decreasing level of trust in government information on COVID-19 vaccines (odds ratio [OR] 4.6, 95% CI 2.6-8.0). We made a similar finding in those who believed COVID-19 vaccines could alter DNA and genetic information (OR 5.2, 95% CI 3.1-8.8). CONCLUSIONS: Misinformation regarding COVID-19 vaccines reaches and influences HCWs. A high proportion of the sampled HCWs believed that COVID-19 vaccines contained microchips or that the vaccines could alter recipients' DNA and genetic information. This might have negative consequences in terms of the HCWs' own COVID-19 vaccination and their influence on other people. Lack of trust in government and its institutions might explain the belief in both conspiracy theories and vaccine hesitancy. There is a need for health care stakeholders in Nigeria and around the world to actively counteract misinformation, especially on social media, and give HCWs necessary scientifically sound information.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207