Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35679276›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Understanding determinants of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance in India: A qualitative study of government officials and civil society stakeholders.

Daniel J Erchick, Madhu Gupta, Madeleine Blunt, Adarsh Bansal, Molly Sauer, Amelia Gerste, Taylor A Holroyd, Brian Wahl, Mathuram Santosham, Rupali J Limaye

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel J ErchickDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2852-280X
Madhu GuptaDepartment of Community Medicine and School of Public Health, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Madeleine BluntDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Adarsh BansalDepartment of Community Medicine and School of Public Health, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Molly SauerDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5837-6997
Amelia GersteDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Taylor A HolroydDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Brian WahlDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Mathuram SantoshamDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Rupali J LimayeDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Johns Hopkins University · USPost Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFew studies have described the drivers of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance in India from the perspective of those involved in the design and implementation of vaccine campaigns-such as government officials and civil society stakeholders-a prerequisite to developing approaches to address this barrier to high immunization coverage and further child health improvements.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative study to understand government officials and civil society stakeholders' perceptions of the drivers of vaccine hesitancy in India. We conducted in-depth phone interviews using a structured guide of open-ended questions with 21 participants from international and national non-governmental organizations, professional associations, and universities, and state and national government-six national-level stakeholders in New Delhi, six state-level stakeholders in Uttar Pradesh, six in Kerala, and three in Gujarat-from July 2020 to October 2020. We analyzed data through a multi-stage process following Grounded Theory. We present findings on individual-level, contextual, and vaccine/vaccination program-specific factors influencing vaccine hesitancy.

resultsWe identified multiple drivers and complex ways they influence vaccine beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors from the perspective of government officials and civil society stakeholders involved in vaccine campaigns. Important individual-level influences were low awareness of the benefits of vaccination, safety concerns, especially related to mild adverse events following immunization, and mistrust in government and health service quality. Contextual-level factors included communications, the media environment, and social media, which serves as a major conduit of misinformation and driver of hesitancy, as well as sociodemographic factors-specific drivers varied widely by income, education, urban/rural setting, and across religious and cultural groups. Among vaccine/vaccination-level issues, vaccine program design and delivery and the role of health care professionals emerged as the strongest determinants of hesitancy.

conclusionsDrivers of vaccine hesitancy in India, as elsewhere, vary widely by local context; successful interventions should address individual, contextual, and vaccine-specific factors. While previous studies focused on individual-level factors, our study demonstrates the equal importance of contextual and vaccine-specific influences, especially the communication and media environment, influential leaders, sociodemographic factors, and frontline health workers.

Indexed as

Patient Acceptance of Health CareVaccinesChildGovernment EmployeesHumansSocietiesVaccinationVaccination HesitancyVaccines

Identifiers

PMID35679276
PMCPMC9182247
OpenAlexW4285685099

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.