ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2015
Acceptability of live attenuated influenza vaccine by vaccine providers in Quebec, Canada.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of evidence on feasibility of administering intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine at home.NPJ vaccines · 2025Article
- Parental vaccine hesitancy and influenza vaccine type preferences during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- The Attitudes of Healthcare Professionals in an Autonomous Community in Spain towards Paediatric Influenza Vaccination.Vaccines · 2024Article
- Acceptability of intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine, influenza knowledge and vaccine intent in The Gambia.Vaccine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) was offered during the 2012-13 influenza season in Quebec, Canada, to children aged between 2 and 17 years with chronic medical conditions. Despite the offer, uptake of the vaccine was low. We assessed the perceptions and opinions about seasonal influenza vaccination and LAIV use among vaccine providers who participated in the 2012-13 campaign. More than 70% of them thought that LAIV was safe and effective and more than 90% considered that the vaccine was well-received by parents and healthcare professionals. According to respondents, the most frequent concerns of parents about LAIV were linked to vaccine efficacy. LAIV is well-accepted by vaccine providers involved in influenza vaccination clinics, but more information about the vaccine and the recommendations for its use are needed to increase vaccine uptake.
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.