Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26425696›Full record

ArticleEBioMedicine2015

Vaccine Hesitancy Among General Practitioners and Its Determinants During Controversies: A National Cross-sectional Survey in France.

Pierre Verger, Lisa Fressard, Fanny Collange, Arnaud Gautier, Christine Jestin, Odile Launay, Jocelyn Raude, Céline Pulcini, Patrick Peretti-Watel

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EBioMedicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 166 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
166citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
20.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

166 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 336 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Understanding Primary Care Physician Vaccination Behaviour: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Pierre VergerINSERM, UMR912 "Economics and Social Sciences Applied to Health & Analysis of Medical Information" (SESSTIM), 23 rue Stanislas Torrents, 13006 Marseille, France ; ORS PACA, Southeastern Health Regional Observatory, 23 rue Stanislas Torrents, 13006 Marseille, France ; Aix Marseille University, IRD, UMR-S912, 58 bd Charles Livon, 13284 Marseille Cedex 07, France ; INSERM, F-CRIN, Innovative Clinical Research Network in Vaccinology (I-REIVAC), GH Cochin Broca Hôtel Dieu, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014 Paris, France.
Lisa FressardINSERM, UMR912 "Economics and Social Sciences Applied to Health & Analysis of Medical Information" (SESSTIM), 23 rue Stanislas Torrents, 13006 Marseille, France ; ORS PACA, Southeastern Health Regional Observatory, 23 rue Stanislas Torrents, 13006 Marseille, France ; Aix Marseille University, IRD, UMR-S912, 58 bd Charles Livon, 13284 Marseille Cedex 07, France.
Fanny CollangeINSERM, UMR912 "Economics and Social Sciences Applied to Health & Analysis of Medical Information" (SESSTIM), 23 rue Stanislas Torrents, 13006 Marseille, France ; ORS PACA, Southeastern Health Regional Observatory, 23 rue Stanislas Torrents, 13006 Marseille, France ; Aix Marseille University, IRD, UMR-S912, 58 bd Charles Livon, 13284 Marseille Cedex 07, France.
Arnaud GautierInstitut national de prévention et d'éducation pour la santé, 42 boulevard de la Libération, 93203 Saint Denis Cedex, France.
Christine JestinInstitut national de prévention et d'éducation pour la santé, 42 boulevard de la Libération, 93203 Saint Denis Cedex, France.
Odile LaunayINSERM, F-CRIN, Innovative Clinical Research Network in Vaccinology (I-REIVAC), GH Cochin Broca Hôtel Dieu, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014 Paris, France ; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Cochin, INSERM CIC 1417, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014 Paris, France.
Jocelyn RaudeEHESP Rennes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, avenue du Professeur Léon-Bernard, 35043 Rennes, France.
Céline PulciniUniversité de Lorraine, Université Paris Descartes, EA 4360 APEMAC, 34 Cours Léopold, 54000 Nancy, France ; CHU de Nancy, Service de Maladies Infectieuses, 29 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 54035 Nancy cedex, France.
Patrick Peretti-WatelINSERM, UMR912 "Economics and Social Sciences Applied to Health & Analysis of Medical Information" (SESSTIM), 23 rue Stanislas Torrents, 13006 Marseille, France ; ORS PACA, Southeastern Health Regional Observatory, 23 rue Stanislas Torrents, 13006 Marseille, France ; Aix Marseille University, IRD, UMR-S912, 58 bd Charles Livon, 13284 Marseille Cedex 07, France.
Inserm · FRInstitut National de Prévention et d’Education pour la Santé · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FRDélégation Paris 5 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to assess: 1) vaccine hesitancy (VH) prevalence among French general practitioners (GPs) through the frequency of their vaccine recommendations, and 2) the determinants of these recommendations.

methodsCross-sectional observational study in 2014 nested in a national panel of 1712 randomly selected GPs in private practice in France. We constructed a score of self-reported recommendation frequency for 6 specific vaccines to target populations.

results16% to 43% of GPs sometimes or never recommended at least one specific vaccine to their target patients. Multivariable logistic regressions of the dichotomized score showed that GPs recommended vaccines frequently when they felt comfortable explaining their benefits and risks to patients (OR = 1.87; 1.35-2.59), or trusted official sources of information highly (OR = 1.40; 1.01-1.93). They recommended vaccines infrequently when they considered that adverse effects were likely (OR = 0.71; 0.52-0.96) or doubted the vaccine's utility (OR = 0.21; 0.15-0.29).

interpretationOur findings show that after repeated vaccine controversies in France, some VH exists among French GPs, whose recommendation behaviors depend on their trust in authorities, their perception of the utility and risks of vaccines, and their comfort in explaining them. Further research is needed to confirm these results among health care workers in other countries.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthTreatment RefusalVaccinationVaccinesAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFranceHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceVaccinesAdverse effectsAttitudes of health personnelGeneral practitionersPrivate practiceTrustVaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID26425696
PMCPMC4563133
OpenAlexW1862520490

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.