Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35893827›Full record

ArticleVaccines2022

COVID-19 Vaccination Status among Pregnant and Postpartum Women-A Cross-Sectional Study on More Than 1000 Individuals.

Urszula Nowacka, Paulina Malarkiewicz, Janusz Sierdzinski, Aleksandra Januszaniec, Szymon Kozłowski, Tadeusz Issat

Open access · goldAbstract 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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Acceptance of the COVID-19 Vaccine Among Postpartum Women in Five Countries.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Maternal Vaccination in Pregnancy: An Assessment of Influenza, Pertussis, and COVID-19 Vaccination Rates in Cracow, Poland.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Urszula NowackaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Mother and Child, Kasprzaka 17a, 01-211 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-8220-969X
Paulina MalarkiewiczDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Collegium Medicum of the University of Warmia and Mazury, Al. Warszawska 30, 10-082 Olsztyn, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7677-3910
Janusz SierdzinskiDepartment of Medical Informatics and Telemedicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Litewska 14/16, 00-581 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-7395-9050
Aleksandra JanuszaniecDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Mother and Child, Kasprzaka 17a, 01-211 Warsaw, Poland.
Szymon KozłowskiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Mother and Child, Kasprzaka 17a, 01-211 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5492-0676
Tadeusz IssatDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Mother and Child, Kasprzaka 17a, 01-211 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-3647-3550
Medical University of Warsaw · PLUniversity of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pregnancy is a well-known factor for vaccine hesitancy and immunization remains the most effective form of prevention against coronavirus disease (COVID-19) related complications. The objective was to estimate vaccine uptake and hesitancy rate, characteristics, and factors contributing to a decision-making process among pregnant and postpartum individuals. This was a prospective cross-sectional study on 1033 pregnant (54.1%) and postpartum (45.9%) women conducted between December 2021 and March 2022 in a tertiary center for maternal−fetal medicine. Logistic regression was used to assess characteristics related to the vaccination decision process. Among responders, 74% were vaccinated and 26% were hesitant (9% planning to vaccinate and 17% totally opposed). Only 59.8% were offered a vaccine by healthcare professionals. Women with higher levels of education (OR 2.26, p < 0.0001), who received positive feedback about vaccination (OR 2.74, p = 0.0172), or were informed about COVID-19 complications in pregnancy (OR 2.6, p < 0.0001) were most likely to accept the vaccination. Hesitancy was associated with multiparity (≥3, OR 4.76, p = 0.006), worse educational status (OR 2.29, p < 0.0001), and lack of previous COVID-19 infection (OR 1.89, p < 0.0001). The most common reason for rejection was insufficient safety data (57%). Understanding factors behind vaccination status is crucial in lowering complications in mothers and newborns and targeted action may facilitate the uptake.

Indexed as

COVID-19fetusmaternal–fetal medicinepregnancyTdap vaccinevaccinationvaccination statusvaccinevaccine hesitancyvaccine uptake

Identifiers

PMID35893827
PMCPMC9330718
OpenAlexW4287877557

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.