Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38318231›Full record

ArticleVaccine: X2024

Researching childhood vaccine hesitancy in the wake of COVID-19.

Alistair Anderson, Tom Douglass, Pru Hobson-West

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Alistair AndersonSchool of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, NottinghamNG7 2RD, United Kingdom.
Tom DouglassDepartment of Social Work and Social Care, University of Birmingham, BirminghamB15 2TT, United Kingdom.
Pru Hobson-WestSchool of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, NottinghamNG7 2RD, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a seismic effect on public healthcare, vaccine production, and on society. However, the pandemic has also had a methodological impact on social researchers, including those seeking to better understand vaccine hesitancy in relation to childhood vaccines. In this short communication, we describe the challenging experience of recruiting and conducting qualitative interviews with UK healthcare professionals and vaccine hesitant parents in early 2022. We also explore the way in which the context of COVID influenced our data analysis. Finally, we make recommendations for how researchers, including those using qualitative or quantitative methods, might learn from our experiences, as the complex and delicate relationship between society and vaccines continues to evolve in the wake of the pandemic.

Indexed as

Childhood vaccinationCOVID-19ImmunisationQualitative methodsVaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID38318231
PMCPMC10839437

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.