Cited by 2Vaccine Coverage and HesitancySARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchMisinformation and Its Impacts

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Letter to the editor to: Verger P and Dubé E. Restoring confidence in vaccines in the COVID-19 era, expert review of vaccines, 2020; 19(11):991-3

Open access
Ridda, Iman, Chamberlain, Richard, Haber, Rita, Rashid, Harunor·2021·Expert Review of Vaccines

Abstract

Dear Editor,We read the intriguing editorial titled, ‘Restoring confidence in vaccines in the COVID-19 era’ by Verger and Dubé [1]. Buttressed by examples from mainstream populations and healthcare...

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14760584.2021.1903880

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Other systematic reviews showed influenza vaccine immunogenicity with lower hospitalization and mortality risk among persons with DM, especially those over 65, compared with healthy individuals.

    “Other systematic reviews have demonstrated effective immunogenicity of influenza vaccine with decreased risk for hospitalization and mortality among persons with DM (especially those aged >65 years) compared with healthy individuals.”

    From American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update. (2022) · cites this paper as [1830]

    The Dear Editor section reports a survey of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in a Hispanic community, not influenza vaccine outcomes in people with diabetes. Searches for influenza immunogenicity, diabetes, hospitalization, mortality, and adults over 65 found no passage in our copy addressing the claimed comparison with healthy individuals. Page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. La Vecchia C, 2020, Med Lav, 111, 445

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ridda, I., Chamberlain, R., Haber, R., & Rashid, H.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M International University (US)
  • Department of Health, City of Laredo, Laredo, Tx, USA
  • Children's Hospital at Westmead (AU)
Corresponding author
Ridda, Iman
Venue
Expert Review of Vaccines
Published
2021-04-05
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
1-3
ISSN
  • 1476-0584 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-8395
OpenAlex
W3137969924
Cited by
2
References
16
Citations by year
2022: 2
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Expert Review of Vaccines (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
Keywords
vaccine confidence, COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine hesitancy, healthcare workers
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Humans, Vaccination, Vaccines

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review