ArticleScientific reports2024
A qualitative study of pregnant women's perceptions and decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination in Thailand.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies to correct vaccine misinformation on social media for pregnant women and the impact of vaccine skepticism.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Attitude to RSV Vaccination Among a Cohort of Pregnant Women in Jordan: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Perceptions of influenza and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among health care personnel in Thailand, 2024.PloS one · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To identify pregnant women's attitudes towards, and acceptance and rejection of, COVID-19 vaccination. This prospective, descriptive, implementation study was conducted in the Antenatal clinic of Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. In Phase I, 40 pregnant women were interviewed. Phase II consisted of questionnaire development and data validation. In Phase III, the questionnaire was administered to 400 participants. Pregnant women's attitudes towards and acceptance and rejection of COVID-19 vaccination. Most pregnant women were uncertain about the potential harm of vaccination to themselves or their unborn child, including risks such as miscarriage or premature birth (59-66/101 [58.4%-65.3%]; OR 2.53-8.33; 95% CI 1.23-3.60, 5.17-19.30; P < 0.001) compared to those who disagreed with vaccination. Their vaccination decisions were significantly influenced by social media information regarding vaccination complications in pregnant women (74/101 [73.3%]; OR 15.95; 95% CI 2.15-118.55; P = 0.001) compared to those who disagreed with vaccination. Most pregnant women opined that they should not receive a COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 6.57; 95% CI 2.44-17.70; P = 0.001). Most also rejected vaccination despite being aware of its benefits (AOR 17.14; 95% CI 6.89-42.62; P < 0.001). Social media messages and obligatory vaccination certifications influence maternal vaccination decisions. Pregnant women believe vaccination helps prevent COVID-19 infection and reduces its severity. Nevertheless, the primary reason for their refusal was concern about potential harm to their unborn child or themselves during pregnancy.The Thai clinical trials registry: TCTR20211126006.
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.