ArticleSozial- und Praventivmedizin2002
[How do pediatricians vaccinate in Munich? A health care epidemiological study].
Article in Sozial- und Praventivmedizin, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are healthcare workers' intentions to vaccinate related to their knowledge, beliefs and attitudes? A systematic review.BMC public health · 2013Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe goal was to determine vaccination rates and predictors of vaccination behaviour of pediatricians in Munich, Germany.
methodsStandardised questionnaires were sent to all 133 office-based pediatricians in Munich.
results97 questionnaires (73%) were returned completely. Vaccination rates were sufficiently against diphtheria, tetanus, and poliomyelitis only. The other vaccinations recommended by the national immunisation advisory board (STIKO) were carried out to an insufficient extent. Vaccination rates of measles, mumps, and rubella were low. Parents' informed consent to STIKO's recommendations was the main determining factor of vaccination rates. Physicians' uncertainty in assessing contra-indications correctly was another important reason for insufficient vaccination rates.
conclusionsThe health target of eliminating measles will not likely be reached. STIKO's recommendations as well as periodically vocational training courses, should be more compulsory to physicians. Self-responsibility of patients and parents should be raised by financial incentives on sick funds premiums.
Indexed as
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.