ArticleCureus2024
Myths Pertaining to COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnant Women Attending a Rural Tertiary Care Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic led to the rise of various social issues apart from medical ones. Several myths regarding COVID-19 vaccination were found worldwide, and some of the common ones identified were abortions, birth defects, bad pregnancy outcomes such as abortions, ectopic pregnancy, risk of infertility, and irregular menstrual cycles. Although no scientific theories or data backed those myths, pregnancy was still omitted from trials for a long time as any drug/vaccine given during pregnancy may affect the fetus. Objective The objective of this study was to evaluate the vaccination status of pregnant women (PW) regarding COVID-19 and explore the factors influencing those who chose not to get the initial dose, second dose, or booster dose. Methodology A total of 747 PW were enrolled in the current study. Information related to sociodemographic data, clinical data, COVID-19 vaccine status, and rationale for choosing not to receive the COVID-19 vaccination was analyzed using a prestructured and validated Performa. Results The mean age and gestational age of the women enrolled for the study was 27.39 ± 3.75 years and 30.21 ± 7.30 weeks, respectively. The first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine was not received by 40 (5.4%) subjects, and the second dose was pending in 142 (19%) women, and none of them received booster dose. The prevalent cause for abstaining from receiving the COVID-19 vaccination was the fear of abortion in 179 (24%) subjects, followed by the fear of vaccine-related side effects in 142 (19%) subjects. There was a significant correlation between acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination and education and employment. Conclusion The present study indicated that most women have taken the COVID-19 vaccine before conception and that none received the first, second, or booster dose during pregnancy, even if it was due. Women need to be educated about the benefits of vaccination to enhance the compliance rate of COVID-19 vaccination and reduce COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality during pregnancy.
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.