Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34583779›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of medical research2021

Determinants of influenza vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in Europe: a systematic review.

Gbadebo Collins Adeyanju, Elena Engel, Laura Koch, Tabea Ranzinger, Imtiaz Bin Mohammed Shahid, Micheal G Head, Sarah Eitze, Cornelia Betsch

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing 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

45 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
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Gbadebo Collins AdeyanjuCentre for Empirical Research in Economics and Behavioural Science (CEREB), University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany. gbadebo.adeyanju@uni-erfurt.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5398-0183
Elena EngelMedia and Communication Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.
Laura KochMedia and Communication Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.
Tabea RanzingerMedia and Communication Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.
Imtiaz Bin Mohammed ShahidWilly Brandt School of Public Policy, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.
Micheal G HeadClinical Informatics Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Sarah EitzeCentre for Empirical Research in Economics and Behavioural Science (CEREB), University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.
Cornelia BetschCentre for Empirical Research in Economics and Behavioural Science (CEREB), University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnant women are at high risk for severe influenza. However, maternal influenza vaccination uptake in most World Health Organization (WHO) European Region countries remains low, despite the presence of widespread national recommendations. An influenza vaccination reduces influenza-associated morbidity and mortality in pregnancy, as well as providing newborns with protection in their first months. Potential determinants of vaccine hesitancy need to be identified to develop strategies that can increase vaccine acceptance and uptake among pregnant women. The primary objective of the systematic review is to identify the individual determinants of influenza vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in Europe, and how to overcome the hesitancy.

methodsDatabases were searched for peer-reviewed qualitative and quantitative studies published between 2009 and 2019 inclusive. Databases included PubMed via MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, SAGE Journals, Taylor and Francis and Springer nature. These covered themes including psychology, medicine, and public health. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach, 11 studies were eligible and analyzed for significant determinants of influenza vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in Europe.

resultsThe most commonly reported factors were psychological aspects, for example concerns about safety and risks to mother and child, or general low risk perception of becoming ill from influenza. Doubts about the effectiveness of the vaccine and a lack of knowledge about this topic were further factors. There was also influence of contextual factors, such as healthcare workers not providing adequate knowledge about the influenza vaccine or the pregnant lady stating their antivaccine sentiment.

conclusionHealth promotion that specifically increases knowledge among pregnant women about influenza and vaccination is important, supporting a valid risk judgment by the pregnant lady. The development of new information strategies for dialogue between healthcare providers and pregnant women should form part of this strategy.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeFemaleHumansInfluenza A virusInfluenza, HumanPregnancyPregnant PeopleVaccinationEuropeInfectious diseasesInfluenzaMaternalPregnant womenReviewVaccinationVaccine delayVaccine hesitancyVaccine refusal

Identifiers

PMID34583779
PMCPMC8477621

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.