Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35335047›Full record

ArticleVaccines2022

Assessing Community Acceptance of Maternal Immunisation in Rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: A Qualitative Investigation.

Rujeko Samanthia Chimukuche, Nothando Ngwenya, Janet Seeley, Petronella Samukelisiwe Nxumalo, Zama Pinky Nxumalo, Motlatso Godongwana, Nomasonto Radebe, Nellie Myburgh, Sunday A Adedini, Clare Cutland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

10 authors.

Rujeko Samanthia ChimukucheSocial Science Department, Africa Health Research Institute, Mtubatuba 3935, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-4890-2105
Nothando NgwenyaSocial Science Department, Africa Health Research Institute, Mtubatuba 3935, South Africa.
Janet SeeleySocial Science Department, Africa Health Research Institute, Mtubatuba 3935, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-0583-5272
Petronella Samukelisiwe NxumaloSocial Science Department, Africa Health Research Institute, Mtubatuba 3935, South Africa.
Zama Pinky NxumaloSocial Science Department, Africa Health Research Institute, Mtubatuba 3935, South Africa.
Motlatso GodongwanaProgramme in Demography and Population Studies, Schools of Public Health and Social Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2193, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-0981-732X
Nomasonto RadebeMedical Research Council: Wits Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Analytics Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2193, South Africa.
Nellie MyburghMedical Research Council: Wits Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Analytics Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2193, South Africa.
Sunday A AdediniProgramme in Demography and Population Studies, Schools of Public Health and Social Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2193, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-0378-1941
Clare CutlandMedical Research Council: Wits Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Analytics Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2193, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-8250-8307

Funding

Immunizing Pregnant Women and Infants Network (IMPRINT), United Kingdom N/AWellcome Strategic Core award 201433/Z/16/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the significant benefits of maternal immunisation, uptake remains low in many parts of the world. In this qualitative study, we aimed to assess the factors that influence pregnant women's decision to engage with maternal immunisation in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. We conducted in-depth interviews with a total of 28 purposively sampled pregnant women and key informants using semi-structured topic guides. Data analysis was conducted using a modified Health Belief Model framework that included constructs of barriers to action, modifying factors of cue to action and perceived social norms. The findings show that traditional customs and institutional barriers such as low-quality health service delivery, long queues, and distance to the health facilities, immunisation vaccine stockouts and low levels of maternal knowledge influence the choice and decision to engage with maternal immunisation. Understanding health-related behaviours and addressing barriers to care is important in facilitating vaccination uptake. This study contributes to the understanding of maternal immunisation uptake in low-resource settings.

Indexed as

maternal healthcarematernal immunisationtetanus toxoidvaccine uptake

Identifiers

PMID35335047
PMCPMC8951159

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.