Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30981025›Full record

ArticleAcademic pediatrics

Refusal of Vitamin K by Parents of Newborns: A Qualitative Study.

Jaspreet Loyal, Theresa R Weiss, Jessica H Cheng, Laura R Kair, Eve Colson

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Academic pediatrics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Neonatologists and vitamin K hesitancy.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Vitamin K shot in newborn babies: An unprecedented sequelae.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jaspreet LoyalDepartment of Pediatrics (J Loyal and TR Weiss), Yale University, New Haven, Conn. Electronic address: Jaspreet.Loyal@yale.edu.
Theresa R WeissDepartment of Pediatrics (J Loyal and TR Weiss), Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
Jessica H ChengDepartment of Pediatrics (JH Cheng and LR Kair), University of California Davis, Sacramento.
Laura R KairDepartment of Pediatrics (JH Cheng and LR Kair), University of California Davis, Sacramento.
Eve ColsonDepartment of Pediatrics (E Colson), Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo.
University of California, Davis · USYale University · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR001860 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KENYON, NICHOLAS J., LYLES, COURTNEY REES · 2016 to 2025
$47.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001860NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDespite American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations, some parents refuse intramuscular (IM) vitamin K as prophylaxis against vitamin K deficiency bleeding for their newborns. The purpose of our study was to describe attitudes and perceptions of parents who choose to defer IM vitamin K for their newborns.

methodsUsing qualitative methodology, we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with parents of newborns in 3 hospitals in Connecticut and California. We used the grounded theory approach and the constant comparative method until saturation was reached.

resultsNineteen participants (17 mothers and 2 fathers) of 17 newborns were interviewed; 14 newborns did not receive IM vitamin K due to refusal by the parents, and for 3 newborns IM vitamin K administration was delayed due to initial hesitation by the parents. Four major themes emerged: 1) risk-to-benefit ratio, where parents refused IM vitamin K due to a perceived risk to their newborn from preservatives, for example; 2) "natural" approaches, which led to seeking oral vitamin K or increasing the mother's own prenatal dietary vitamin K intake; 3) placement of trust and mistrust, which involved mistrust of the medical and pharmaceutical community with overlapping concerns about vaccines and trust of self, like-minded allopathic and non-allopathic health care providers, the social circle, the internet, and social media; and 4) informed by experiences, reflecting hospital experiences with prior pregnancies and communication with health care providers.

conclusionsParents' perception of risk, preference for alternative options, trust, and communication with health care providers were pivotal factors when making decisions about IM vitamin K.

Indexed as

AdultAntifibrinolytic AgentsFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInfant, NewbornInjections, IntramuscularMaleParentsQualitative ResearchTreatment RefusalVitamin KVitamin K Deficiency BleedingAntifibrinolytic AgentsVitamin Knewbornsparent perspectivesvitamin K refusal

Identifiers

PMID30981025
PMCPMC7028442
OpenAlexW2937807283

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.