Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29565990›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2018

Patient's behaviors and missed opportunities for vaccination against seasonal epidemic influenza and evaluation of their impact on patient's influenza vaccine uptake.

Enrique Casalino, Aiham Ghazali, Donia Bouzid, Stephanie Antoniol, Laurent Pereira, Philippe Kenway, Christophe Choquet, Emergency Department study group on respiratory viruses

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  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
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

8 authors.

Enrique CasalinoEmergency Department, Hôpital Bichat, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-4352-6729
Aiham GhazaliEmergency Department, Hôpital Bichat, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Donia BouzidEmergency Department, Hôpital Bichat, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Stephanie AntoniolEmergency Department, Hôpital Bichat, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Laurent PereiraEmergency Department, Hôpital Bichat, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Philippe KenwayEmergency Department, Hôpital Bichat, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Christophe ChoquetEmergency Department, Hôpital Bichat, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Emergency Department study group on respiratory viruses

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesInfluenza vaccination (IV) coverage remains low in France. Objectives were to assess patient knowledge and behaviors and missed opportunities for vaccination (MO) and their impact on vaccine uptake.

methodsThis is a prospective-observational study, including emergency department patients at risk for severe influenza. Patients were interviewed about their knowledge and behaviors. We evaluated the health-care voucher scheme (HCVS) and MO.

results868 patients were included. Vaccine uptake was 33.2%, 42% of patients knew about the possible severity of influenza, 23% thought that they were not at risk for severe influenza, 39% knew that they have an indication for the vaccine, and 4.3% to 11.5% expressed reservations concerning IV side effects and effectiveness. HCVS was used by 44.3% of patients, but only 14.8% had been vaccinated. MO were reported by 484 patients (69.4%) declaring 1104 consultations and 148 IV propositions (86.6%). Predictors of vaccine uptake (p<0.0001) were: knowledge of serious and fatal influenza forms [OR 0.36 (CI95% 0.25-0.5)]; confidence in influenza vaccine effectiveness [0.38 (0.2-0.7)]; opposition to vaccines [0.22 (0.1-0.48)]; visit to general practitioner [4.53 (2.9-7.1)]; general practitioner proposed IV [2.1 (1.2-3.4)].

conclusionOur results indicate that high rate of missed opportunities, some patient behaviors and general practitioner visits may explain low influenza vaccine uptake, and that HCVS use is a complex process. Of interest, we found that the patient's knowledge of the potential severity of influenza is not sufficient to promote vaccine, suggesting that the information strategy must be adapted to each patient behavior.

Indexed as

EpidemicsInfluenza, HumanPatient Acceptance of Health CareSeasonsTreatment RefusalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansInfluenza VaccinesMaleMiddle AgedVaccinationInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID29565990
PMCPMC5863940

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.