Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26965449›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2015

Skewed risk perceptions in pregnant women: the case of influenza vaccination.

Birte Bödeker, Cornelia Betsch, Ole Wichmann

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, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Birte BödekerDepartment for Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Immunization Unit, Robert Koch Institute, Seestraße 10, 13353, Berlin, Germany. BoedekerB@rki.de.
Cornelia BetschDepartment of Psychology, Center for Empirical Research in Economics and Behavioral Sciences, University of Erfurt, Nordhäuserstraße 63, 99089, Erfurt, Germany.
Ole WichmannDepartment for Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Immunization Unit, Robert Koch Institute, Seestraße 10, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Robert Koch Institute · DEUniversity of Erfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnant women and their newborns have an increased risk of developing severe influenza and influenza-related complications. In Germany, seasonal influenza vaccination is recommended for pregnant women since 2010. However, little is known about pregnant women's vaccination-related knowledge and attitudes, as well as their risk perceptions. This study therefore assessed pregnant women's vaccination-related knowledge, risk perceptions related to influenza disease and influenza vaccination during pregnancy, and aimed to identify determinants of influenza vaccination uptake during pregnancy in Germany.

methodsBetween 2012 and 2014, a nationwide web-based prospective cohort study with follow-up interviews was conducted in initially pregnant women who gave birth over the study period. Control groups were set up in a cross-sectional fashion during the follow-up interviews. Women who participated in both, the baseline interview before giving birth and in the 1st interview after giving birth were included in the analysis. Univariate and multiple logistic regression were used to identify associations between influenza vaccination uptake and sociodemographic characteristics as well as items assessing attitude and knowledge.

resultsIn total, 838 women were included in the analyses. Pregnant women had a positive attitude towards vaccination in general, but only modest vaccination knowledge. Overall, 10.9 % of women were vaccinated against seasonal influenza during pregnancy. While pregnant women perceived classical childhood diseases to be more risky than the respective vaccinations, this relation reversed for influenza: The risk of vaccination was perceived higher than the risk of the disease. These two types of risk perceptions independently determined influenza vaccination uptake-higher perception of disease risk and lower perceptions of vaccination-related risks increased uptake. Additionally, knowledge about the vaccination recommendation for pregnant women and a positive gynaecologist's attitude towards vaccination during pregnancy influenced the uptake significantly.

conclusionsInfluenza vaccination uptake in pregnant women is low in Germany. Tailored communication strategies for pregnant women should focus especially on changing the perceptions of personal risks regarding influenza and influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Gynaecologists should be made aware about their crucial role in supporting vaccination decision-making of pregnant women and the need to provide relevant information to counteract misconceptions.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInfluenza VaccinesAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGermanyHumansInfluenza, HumanMiddle AgedPregnancyPregnant PeopleProspective StudiesQualitative ResearchRisk AssessmentInfluenza VaccinesAttitudesGermanyInfluenzaPregnancyRisk perceptionVaccination

Identifiers

PMID26965449
PMCPMC4785668
OpenAlexW2298869852

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.