Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30268731›Full record

ArticleVaccine2018

Pregnant women's attitudes toward Zika virus vaccine trial participation.

Ilona Telefus Goldfarb, Elana Jaffe, Kaitlyn James, Anne Drapkin Lyerly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Ilona Telefus GoldfarbDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States. Electronic address: igoldfarb@partners.org.
Elana JaffeCenter for Bioethics and Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.
Kaitlyn JamesDeborah Kelly Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Anne Drapkin LyerlyCenter for Bioethics and Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.

Funding

The PHASES Project: Pregnancy and HIV/AIDS-Seeking Equitable StudyR01AI108368 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DAY, SUZANNE LOUISE, LYERLY, ANNE DRAPKIN · 2015 to 2024
$6.4M
Integrating Decision Making Studies into HIV Cure Trials: A real-time longitudinal assessmentR01AI127024 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HENDERSON, GAIL E · 2016 to 2019
$2.2M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI108368NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI127024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAs Zika virus infection during pregnancy can cause a range of congenital anomalies, pregnant women may be a target population for vaccination in future outbreaks. Their inclusion in vaccine trials is critical to ensure safe and effective vaccines in pregnancy. Though many vaccine candidates are in development, pregnant women's willingness to participate in Zika virus vaccine research is unknown. This study aims to describe pregnant women's attitudes toward Zika virus vaccine research participation, as well as perceived barriers to and facilitators of enrollment.

methodsPregnant and recently postpartum women (n = 128) attending prenatal care at Massachusetts General Hospital completed surveys querying their willingness to participate in four hypothetical Zika virus vaccine trials and their motivations for participation. Demographics, information on prior Zika virus exposure, and vaccine acceptance were collected.

resultsMost women (77%) accepted participation in at least one hypothetical Zika virus vaccine trial, and women were significantly more likely to accept prospective enrollment in an inactivated vaccine trial compared to a live-attenuated vaccine trial (p-value <0.0001) or a nucleic acid-based vaccine trial (p-value <0.0444). Important motivators for participation included evidence from research with pregnant and non-pregnant people, a desire to protect the baby from Zika, perceptions of vaccine safety, and provider recommendation.

conclusionsA majority of women in this cohort were willing to participate in a Zika virus vaccine trial while pregnant, however, differences in acceptance exist between vaccine platforms. The high value placed on evidence by participants highlights the importance of gathering and communicating pregnancy-specific data to potential research participants and their providers. Women's motivations for accepting research participation during pregnancy are important to inform the Zika virus vaccine research agenda, candidate prioritization, and trial design.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CarePostpartum PeriodPregnancyPregnant PeoplePrenatal CareSurveys and QuestionnairesVaccinationZika VirusZika Virus InfectionEthicsPregnancyVaccine researchZika virus

Identifiers

PMID30268731
PMCPMC6219626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.