ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2024
Perceptions of yellow fever emergency mass vaccinations among vulnerable groups in Uganda: A qualitative study.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 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.
- Rural Inhabitants' Perception-Induced Immunisation Status: The Case of Yellow Fever Vaccination in the Ashanti Region of Ghana.Rwanda journal of medicine and health sciences · 2025Article
- Community perceptions of yellow fever and its treatment practices in regions with reported outbreaks in Uganda: A qualitative study.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Perspective of Quilombola Communities in Brazil on a Yellow Fever Outbreak and Vaccination.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundYellow fever (YF), a mosquito-borne viral hemorrhagic fever, is endemic in Uganda and causes frequent outbreaks. A total of 1.6 million people were vaccinated during emergency mass immunization campaigns in 2011 and 2016. This study explored local perceptions of YF emergency mass immunization among vulnerable groups to inform future vaccination campaigns. METHODOLOGY: In this qualitative study, we conducted 43 semi-structured interviews, 4 focus group discussions, and 10 expert interviews with 76 participants. Data were collected in six affected districts with emergency mass vaccination. We included vulnerable groups (people ≥ 65 years and pregnant women) who are typically excluded from YF vaccination except during mass immunization. Data analysis was conducted using grounded theory. Inductive coding was utilized, progressing through open, axial, and selective coding. PRINCIPAL
findingsParticipants relied on community sources for information about the YF mass vaccination. Information was disseminated door-to-door, in community spaces, during religious gatherings, and on the radio. However, most respondents had no knowledge of the vaccine, and it was unclear to them whether a booster dose was required. In addition, the simultaneous presidential election during the mass vaccination campaign led to suspicion and resistance to vaccination. The lack of reliable and trustworthy information and the politicization of vaccination campaigns reinforced mistrust of YF vaccines. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: People in remote areas affected by YF outbreaks rely on community sources of information. We therefore recommend improving health education, communication, and engagement through respected and trusted community members. Vaccination campaigns can never be seen as detached from political systems and power relations.
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.