ArticlePloS one2021
Quantifying the effect of Wakefield et al. (1998) on skepticism about MMR vaccine safety in the U.S.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tailoring educational interventions targeting parental vaccine hesitancy: a systematic review of quantitative studies.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Estimating the effects of interventions on increasing vaccination: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2025Pooled it
- Misinformation About COVID-19 Vaccines on Social Media: Rapid Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Trends in Selective Childhood Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) Vaccine Nonreceipt Surrounding the MMR-Autism Controversy: National Immunization Survey Analyses, 1996-2019.Journal of community health · 2026Article
- Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy in Louisiana Through Social Media Listening and Community Feedback: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2026Article
- Measles seroprevalence by birth cohort across the lifespan: a population-based, cross-sectional serosurvey in British Columbia, Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025Article
- Retractions in Otolaryngology Publications.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2025Article
- Vaccines work… and do not cause autism.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Quantifying Public Engagement With Science and Malinformation on COVID-19 Vaccines: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The ethics of science journalism in medicine: a science and technology studies approach.Journal of medical ethics and history of medicine · 2025Article
- The folklore of the "Swift" effect - lessons for medical research and clinical practice.PloS one · 2025Article
- Adolescents' knowledge of and confidence in vaccines improves with board game play.Discover education · 2025Article
- Scrutinizing the COVID-19 vaccine safety debate.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Article
- Arise robot overlords! A synergy of artificial intelligence in the evolution of scientific writing and publishing.Pediatric research · 2024Article
- Misunderstanding the harms of online misinformation.Nature · 2024Review
- Personal rights over public Health: Anti-vaccine rhetoric in the Texas Legislature.Vaccine: X · 2024Article
- Vaccine rhetoric on social media and COVID-19 vaccine uptake rates: A triangulation using self-reported vaccine acceptance.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Acceptance (HPV-VA) and Vaccine Uptake (HPV-VU): assessing the impact of theory, culture, and trusted sources of information in a Hispanic community.BMC public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEfforts to trace the rise of childhood vaccine safety concerns in the US often suggest Andrew Wakefield and colleagues' retracted 1998 Lancet study (AW98)-which alleged that the MMR vaccine can cause children to develop autism-as a primary cause of US vaccine skepticism. However, a lack of public opinion data on MMR safety collected before/after AW98's publication obscures whether anecdotal accounts are indicative of a potentially-causal effect.
methodsWe address this problem using a regression discontinuity framework to study change in monthly MMR injury claims (N = 74,850; from 1990-2019) from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) to proxy concern about vaccine safety. Additionally, we suggest a potential mechanism for the effect of AW98 on vaccine skepticism, via automated sentiment analyses of MMR-related news stories (N = 674; from 1996-2000) in major television and newspaper outlets.
resultsAW98 led to an immediate increase of about 70 MMR injury claims cases per month, averaging across six estimation strategies (meta-analytic effect = 70.44 [52.19, 88.75], p < 0.01). Preliminary evidence suggests that the volume of negative media attention to MMR increased in the weeks following AW98's publication, across four estimation strategies (meta-analytic effect = 9.59% [3.66, 15.51], p < 0.01).
conclusionsVaccine skepticism increased following the publication of AW98, which was potentially made possible by increased negative media coverage of MMR. SIGNIFICANCE: Childhood vaccine skepticism presents an important challenge to widespread vaccine uptake, and undermines support for pro-vaccine health policies. In addition to advancing our understanding of the previously-obscured origins of US vaccine skepticism, our work cautions that high-profile media attention to inaccurate scientific studies can undermine public confidence in vaccines. We conclude by offering several recommendations that researchers and health communicators might consider to detect and address future threats to vaccine confidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.