ArticleWomen's health (London, England)
"I was having an internal conflict with myself." COVID-19 vaccination decision-making processes among pregnant women.
Article in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Examining Discordance in Perceptions of COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccine Safety During Pregnancy Among a Cohort of US Adults.Vaccines · 2026Article
- The impact of COVID-19 on women's mental health and coping during pregnancy and postpartum.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVaccination serves as an efficient primary means of control for infectious diseases. However, in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women within the United States had the lowest rates of COVID-19 vaccination and reported the lowest intent to vaccinate.
objectivesTo explore the decision-making process for COVID-19 vaccination for people pregnant during the pandemic.
designA secondary analysis of data from a mixed-methods study that examined the impact of COVID-19 on experiences of prenatal care, birth support, and delivery in the Southern United States.
methodsThis study used a descriptive phenomenological approach to thematically analyze in-depth interviews (
resultsTwo themes emerged, the weighing of parallel risks and priorities from different sources resulting in vaccine decisional conflict and the need to reconcile that conflict via multiple strategies. All participants weighed priorities and risks from multiple areas of their lives and described internal conflict around vaccination. Participants described tailoring decisions to household dynamics, reconciling public and private values around vaccination, and the impact of their identities on the decision-making process. While many described concerns over vaccine safety and fetal health, uniquely, many highlighted weighing the impact of prior pregnancy loss history, with some choosing other preventive measures like social distancing or mask-wearing, which they deemed less risky.
conclusionPregnant people make complex COVID-19 vaccination decisions, which must be considered in future vaccine messaging and advocacy for this group.
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.