Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25884562›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2015

Factors influencing H1N1 vaccine behavior among Manitoba Metis in Canada: a qualitative study.

S Michelle Driedger, Ryan Maier, Chris Furgal, Cindy Jardine

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. International journal of circumpolar health · 2024
    Article
  9. COVID-19 vaccination intention and vaccine hesitancy among citizens of the Métis Nation of Ontario.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021
    Article
  20. Medical experimentation and the roots of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Indigenous Peoples in Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

S Michelle DriedgerDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, S113-750 Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg, Canada. michelle.driedger@umanitoba.ca.
Ryan MaierDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, S113-750 Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg, Canada. ryan.maier@umanitoba.ca.
Chris FurgalIndigenous Environment Studies Program, Trent University, 1600 West Bank Drive, Peterborough, Canada. chrisfurgal@trentu.ca.
Cindy JardineSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, 11405 - 87 Ave, Edmonton, Canada. cindy.jardine@ualberta.ca.
University of Manitoba · CATrent University · CAUniversity of Alberta · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research MOP 102623
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the first wave of the H1N1 influenza pandemic in 2009, Aboriginal populations in Canada experienced disproportionate rates of infection, particularly in the province of Manitoba. To protect those thought to be most at-risk, health authorities in Manitoba listed all Aboriginal people, including Metis, among those able to receive priority access to the novel vaccine when it first became available. Currently, no studies exist that have investigated the attitudes, influences, and vaccine behaviors among Aboriginal communities in Canada. This paper is the first to systematically connect vaccine behavior with the attitudes and beliefs that influenced Metis study participants' H1N1 vaccine decision-making.

methodsResearchers held focus groups (n = 17) with Metis participants in urban, rural, and remote locations of Manitoba following the conclusion of the H1N1 pandemic. Participants were asked about their vaccination decisions and about the factors that influenced their decisions. Following data collection, responses were coded into the broad categories of a social-ecological model, nuanced by categories stemming from earlier research. Responses were then quantified to show the most influential factors in positively or negatively affecting the vaccine decision.

resultsMedia reporting, the influence of peer groups, and prioritization all had positive and negative influential effects on decision making. Whether vaccinated or not, the most negatively influential factors cited by participants were a lack of knowledge about the vaccine and the pandemic as well as concerns about vaccine safety. Risk of contracting H1N1 influenza was the biggest factor in positively influencing a vaccine decision, which in many cases trumped any co-existing negative influencers.

conclusionsMetis experiences of colonialism in Canada deeply affected their perceptions of the vaccine and pandemic, a context that health systems need to take into account when planning response activities in the future. Participants felt under-informed about most aspects of the vaccine and the pandemic, and many vaccine related misconceptions and fears existed. Recommendations include leveraging doctor-patient interactions as a site for sharing vaccine-related knowledge, as well as targeted, culturally-appropriate, and empowering public information strategies to supply reliable vaccine and pandemic information to potentially at-risk Aboriginal populations.

Indexed as

Influenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeAdultDecision MakingFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansIndians, North AmericanInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesMaleManitobaMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchResidence CharacteristicsRisk FactorsInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID25884562
PMCPMC4334920
OpenAlexW1983093898

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.