ArticleVaccines2023
COVID-19 Vaccination during Pregnancy and Lactation: Attitudes and Uptakes before and after Official Recommendations in Germany.
Article in Vaccines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Factors influencing vaccine uptake during pregnancy: A systematic literature review.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Pooled it
- Systematic review protocol on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among lactating people.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- Detection of spike protein in term placentas of COVID-19 vaccinated and/or SARS-CoV-2 infected women.PloS one · 2026Article
- Vaccine Effectiveness in SARS-CoV-2-Infected Pregnant Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Results from a Multicenter Registry-Based Prospective Cohort Study in Germany.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2025Article
- Factors Influencing COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Pregnant and Breastfeeding/Puerperium Women: A Cross-Sectional Study.Vaccines · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVaccination against COVID-19 is an effective measure to mitigate the pandemic. Pregnant and breastfeeding women were not included in registration studies, so official recommendations to vaccinate this vulnerable group appeared belated. Therefore, our aims were to evaluate vaccination uptake, reasons for and against vaccination, and the changes in these depending on the official national recommendations in Germany.
methodsAn anonymous online cross-sectional survey among pregnant and breastfeeding women was conducted prior to and after the publication of the official vaccination recommendation.
resultsData from the convenience sample of 5411 participants (42.9% pregnant; 57% breastfeeding) were analysed. The recommendation was known to 95% of the participants. The information was obtained mainly autonomously (61.6%) and through the media (56.9%). Vaccination uptake increased in pregnant (2.4% before vs. 58.7% after) and breastfeeding women (13.7% vs. 74.7%). As reasons to get vaccinated, pregnant women indicated more fear of the infection than of the side effects of vaccination (52.0% before vs. 66.2% after), intended protection of the baby and oneself (36.0% vs. 62.9%), and limited information about vaccination (53.5% vs. 24.4%).
conclusionThe official national recommendation is widely known and mostly obtained autonomously, thereby showing a high level of awareness and a rise in vaccination uptake. Nonetheless, targeted education campaigns focusing on scientific evidence should be maintained, whereas the engagement of health professionals should be enhanced.
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.