Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37059997›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

Considerable doubt about rubella screening and vaccination among unvaccinated orthodox protestant women: a mixed-methods study.

Anne C de Munter, Jeannine L A Hautvast, Wilhelmina L M Ruijs, Robert A C Ruiter, Marlies E J L Hulscher

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 45% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Anne C de MunterRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, Postbus, Nijmegen, 9101 6500 HB, The Netherlands.
Jeannine L A HautvastRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, Postbus, Nijmegen, 9101 6500 HB, The Netherlands. Jeannine.Hautvast@radboudumc.nl.
Wilhelmina L M RuijsNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, PO box 1, Bilthoven, 3720 BA, The Netherlands.
Robert A C RuiterDepartment of Work & Social Psychology, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, 6200 MD, The Netherlands.
Marlies E J L HulscherRadboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, Postbus, Nijmegen, 9101, 6500 HB, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Medical Center · NLMaastricht University · NLNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen who are susceptible to rubella are advised to vaccinate against rubella to prevent infection in future pregnancies, and thus avert the risk of congenital rubella syndrome in their unborn child. Rubella outbreaks periodically occur in the under-vaccinated orthodox Protestant community in the Netherlands. The objective of this mixed-methods study was to determine and understand personal experience with rubella, perceived rubella susceptibility, and intention to accept rubella screening and vaccination among unvaccinated orthodox Protestant women. The ultimate aim of this study was to inform policy and practice and contribute to the prevention of cases of congenital rubella syndrome.

methodsA mixed-methods study was conducted combining an online survey and semi-structured interviews among unvaccinated Dutch orthodox Protestant women aged 18-40 years. Descriptive analysis was used for quantitative data. Qualitative data was analysed using codes and categories.

resultsResults of the survey (167 participants) showed that most participants had personal experience with rubella (74%, 123/167) and 101 women (61%, 101/167) indicated they had had rubella themselves. More than half of the women were undecided whether to accept rubella susceptibility screening (56%; 87/156) or rubella vaccination (55%; 80/146). Qualitative findings (10 participants) showed that most women thought they were not susceptible to rubella. Indecisiveness and negative attitudes to accept rubella vaccination were related with religious arguments to object vaccination and with women's perception of absence of imminent threat of rubella. Furthermore, results showed presence of misconceptions among women in the interpretation of their susceptibility and high confidence in their parents' memory that they had experienced rubella as a child although no laboratory screening had been conducted.

conclusionsIn light of an imminent rubella outbreak in the Netherlands, a tailored education campaign should be prepared aimed at and established in cooperation with the under-vaccinated orthodox Protestant community. Health care providers should provide adequate information on rubella and support decision-making in order to stimulate women to make a deliberate and informed decision on rubella screening and, if necessary, subsequent vaccination.

Indexed as

RubellaRubella Syndrome, CongenitalDisease SusceptibilityFemaleHumansParentsPregnancyProtestantismVaccinationDecision makingIntentionReligious beliefRubellaVaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID37059997
PMCPMC10102676
OpenAlexW4365516802

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.