Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 411

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Acceptability of Vaccination Against COVID-19 Among Healthcare Workers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Open access
Kabamba Nzaji, Michel, Kabamba Ngombe, Leon, Ngoie Mwamba, Guillaume, Banza Ndala, Deca Blood, Mbidi Miema, Judith, Luhata Lungoyo, Christophe, Lora Mwimba, Bertin, Cikomola Mwana Bene, Aimé, Mukamba Musenga, Elisabeth·2020·Pragmatic and Observational Research

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aims to estimate the acceptability of a future vaccine against COVID-19 and associated factors if offered in Congolese health-care workers (HCWs), since they have the highest direct exposure to the disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted an analytical cross-sectional study among 23 Congolese referral hospitals, including three university hospitals, located in three towns from March through 30 April 2020. The main outcome variable was healthcare workers' acceptance of a future vaccine against COVID-19. The associated factors of vaccination willingness were identified through a logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A sample of 613 HCWs participated in the study and completed the study questionnaire, including 312 (50.9%) men and 301 (49.1%) women. Only 27.7% of HCWs said that they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine if it was available. From the logistic regression analysis, male healthcare workers (ORa=1.17, 95% CI: 1.15-2.60), primarily doctors (ORa=1.59; 95% CI:1.03-2.44) and having a positive attitude towards a COVID-19 vaccine (ORa=11.49; 95% CI: 5.88-22.46) were significantly associated with reporting willingness to be vaccinated. CONCLUSION: For acceptability of vaccination against COVID-19 among others education among HCWs is crucial because health professionals' attitudes about vaccines are an important determinant of their own vaccine uptake and their likelihood of recommending the vaccine to their patients.

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 · 10.2147/por.s271096

Cites

29 of 29 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

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

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 411

Metadata

Authors
Kabamba Nzaji, M., Kabamba Ngombe, L., Ngoie Mwamba, G., Banza Ndala, D. B., Mbidi Miema, J., Luhata Lungoyo, C., Lora Mwimba, B., Cikomola Mwana Bene, A., & Mukamba Musenga, E.
Venue
Pragmatic and Observational Research
Published
2020-10
Volume
Volume 11
Pages
103-109
ISSN
1179-7266 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3094902915
Cited by
411
References
29
FWCI
48.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Acceptability of Vaccination Against COVID-19 Among Healthcare Workers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2147/por.s271096
The paper
Kabamba Nzaji, M., Kabamba Ngombe, L., Ngoie Mwamba, G., Banza Ndala, D. B., Mbidi Miema, J., Luhata Lungoyo, C., Lora Mwimba, B., Cikomola Mwana Bene, A., & Mukamba Musenga, E. (2020). Acceptability of Vaccination Against COVID-19 Among Healthcare Workers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Pragmatic and Observational Research. https://doi.org/10.2147/por.s271096

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.