Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32215243›Full record

ArticleZeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health2008

The public perception of the value of vaccines - the case of Switzerland.

Claire-Anne Siegrist, Marta A Balinska Peroutkova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Claire-Anne Siegrist2Department of Paediatrics, Centre de Vaccinologie et d'Immunologie Néonatale, Université de Genève, C.M.U., 1 rue Michel-Servet, 1211 Genève 4, Switzerland.
Marta A Balinska PeroutkovaVia Graziano 57, 00-165 Roma, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimIn this original article, we seek to analyse the environment in which immunisation policies are adopted and, more specifically, the way the public perception of vaccines influences decision-making, by looking more closely at the case of Switzerland. SUBJECTS AND

methodsHistorical and present-day examples of attitudes towards immunisation and specific vaccines, both on the part of the public and of health-care workers, are reviewed.

resultsDecision-making with regard to vaccine policy implementation has been and is still most often driven by fear: fear of disease (when perceived as rampant and/or dangerous), but also fear of vaccine-associated adverse events (when the disease is less or no longer "visible"). However, methodology for introducing evidence-based immunisation policies exists and can be used by public health authorities, while vaccination information systems (such as the Swiss InfoVac) have proven their usefulness in providing trustworthy, peer-based knowledge to health-care workers.

conclusionOnly information based on clear, evidence-based data gathered and analysed according to solid methodological criteria coupled with adequate information of health-care workers (and thus patients) can ensure in future the implementation of scientifically coherent, publicly acceptable, and equitable immunisation policies.

Indexed as

Evidence-based medicineImmunisation policyVaccine-associated adverse eventsVaccines

Identifiers

PMID32215243
PMCPMC7088404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.