Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25789201›Full record

ArticlePLoS currents2015

Vaccine hesitancy: clarifying a theoretical framework for an ambiguous notion.

Patrick Peretti-Watel, Heidi J Larson, Jeremy K Ward, William S Schulz, Pierre Verger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS currents, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 168 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
168citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

168 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

108 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Patrick Peretti-WatelINSERM, UMR912 (SESSTIM), 13006, Marseille, France; Aix Marseille University, UMR_S912, IRD, 13006, Marseille, France; ORS PACA, Southeastern Health Regional Observatory, 13006, Marseille, France.
Heidi J LarsonDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Jeremy K WardINSERM, UMR912 (SESSTIM), 13006, Marseille, France; Université Paris Diderot, UMR8236 (LIED), 75013 Paris.
William S SchulzDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Pierre VergerINSERM, UMR912 (SESSTIM), 13006, Marseille, France; Aix Marseille University, UMR_S912, IRD, 13006, Marseille, France; ORS PACA, Southeastern Health Regional Observatory, 13006, Marseille, France; Inserm, F-Crin, Innovative Clinical Research Network on Vaccination (I-Reivac).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Today, according to many public health experts, public confidence in vaccines is waning. The term "vaccine hesitancy" (VH) is increasingly used to describe the spread of such vaccine reluctance. But VH is an ambiguous notion and its theoretical background appears uncertain. To clarify this concept, we first review the current definitions of VH in the public health literature and examine its most prominent characteristics. VH has been defined as a set of beliefs, attitudes, or behaviours, or some combination of them, shared by a large and heterogeneous portion of the population and including people who exhibit reluctant conformism (they may either decline a vaccine, delay it or accept it despite their doubts) and vaccine-specific behaviours. Secondly, we underline some of the ambiguities of this notion and argue that it is more a catchall category than a real concept. We also call into question the usefulness of understanding VH as an intermediate position along a continuum ranging from anti-vaccine to pro-vaccine attitudes, and we discuss its qualification as a belief, attitude or behaviour. Thirdly, we propose a theoretical framework, based on previous literature and taking into account some major structural features of contemporary societies, that considers VH as a kind of decision-making process that depends on people's level of commitment to healthism/risk culture and on their level of confidence in the health authorities and mainstream medicine.

Indexed as

Information Seeking Behaviorrisk behaviorrisk culturevaccination behaviorvaccine hesitancy

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.