ReviewHealth SA = SA Gesondheid2021
Predictors of parents' infant vaccination decisions: A concept derivation.
Review in Health SA = SA Gesondheid, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Key factors influencing paediatric COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: a brief overview and Decision-making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory analysis.Public health · 2023Pooled it
- Addressing the consequences of missing vaccines: A case report of pertussis in a child with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.Respiratory medicine case reports · 2025Article
- [Determinants of trust and acceptance of vaccines in the Dominican RepublicDeterminantes da confiança nas vacinas e sua aceitação na República Dominicana].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2025Article
- Models of determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in non-pregnant and pregnant population: Review of current literature".Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The myths surrounding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have prompted scientists to refocus their attention on vaccine hesitancy, which is fuelled by the spread of misinformation. The scientific investigation of behavioural concepts relating to vaccine hesitancy can be enhanced by the examination of behavioural concepts from the field of consumer sciences. South African consumer scientists study personal decisions that contribute to individuals' well-being, including the decisions to prevent ill health. Current data on the predictors of vaccination decisions do not incorporate consumer science constructs imperative in decision-making, which could provide fresh insights in addressing vaccine hesitancy. This study aimed to investigate and illustrate the analogy between concepts of the Health Belief Model (HBM) as parent model, and consumer behaviour that could affect parents' infant vaccination decisions, by applying a concept derivation approach. The HBM was analysed within the context of public health, including literature from consumers' vaccination decisions, medical decisions, paediatrics, vaccinology, virology and nursing. Through a qualitative, theory derivation strategy, six main concepts of the HBM were redefined to consumer sciences, using four iterative concept derivation steps. Concept derivation resulted in consumer behaviour concepts that could be possible predictors of parents' infant vaccination decisions, including consumers' values; risk perception; consideration of immediate and future consequences; self-efficacy; cues to action; demographics; personal information and knowledge. These predictors could be a starting point for a context- and product-specific consumer primary preventive healthcare decisions model. Our findings highlight the opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration in investigating consumer primary healthcare-related behaviour. CONTRIBUTION: This study introduced interfaces between consumer science and health science literature. Through interdisciplinary collaboration, a better understanding of influences to promote primary preventive healthcare can be achieved.
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.