ArticleVaccines2024
Healthcare Providers' and Pregnant People's Preferences for a Preventive to Protect Infants from Serious Illness Due to Respiratory Syncytial Virus.
Article in Vaccines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parental acceptability of new RSV preventive therapies for infants: A cross-sectional survey in Canada.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- What Form of RSV Protection Do Women Prefer: Maternal Vaccination or Infant Immunisation? A Cross-Sectional Survey in Europe.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Taxonomy of the Full Health and Societal Value of Maternal Vaccination to Prevent Infant Respiratory Syncytial Virus Disease.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Review
- Assessment of physicians' perception of pediatrics respiratory syncytial virus disease and preferences for immunization strategies in the United States.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Observational
- Preferences of Dutch Parents and Expectant Parents for Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prevention Strategies: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2025Article
- Infant Respiratory Syncytial Virus Immunization Coverage in the Vaccine Safety Datalink: 2023-2024.Pediatrics · 2025Article
- Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Prevention: A Systematic Review.Vaccines · 2025Review
- A latent class analysis of factors influencing preferences for infant respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) preventives among pregnant people in the United States.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We assessed the impact of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) preventive characteristics on the intentions of pregnant people and healthcare providers (HCPs) to protect infants with a maternal vaccine or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Pregnant people and HCPs who treated pregnant people and/or infants were recruited via convenience sample from a general research panel to complete a cross-sectional, web-based survey, including a discrete choice experiment (DCE) wherein respondents chose between hypothetical RSV preventive profiles varying on five attributes (effectiveness, preventive type [maternal vaccine vs. mAb], injection recipient/timing, type of medical visit required to receive the injection, and duration of protection during RSV season) and a no-preventive option. A best-worst scaling (BWS) exercise was included to explore the impact of additional attributes on preventive preferences. Data were collected between October and November 2022. Attribute-level preference weights and relative importance (RI) were estimated. Overall, 992 pregnant people and 310 HCPs participated. A preventive (vs. none) was chosen 89.2% (pregnant people) and 96.0% (HCPs) of the time (DCE). Effectiveness was most important to preventive choice for pregnant people (RI = 48.0%) and HCPs (RI = 41.7%); all else equal, pregnant people (RI = 5.5%) and HCPs (RI = 7.2%) preferred the maternal vaccine over mAbs, although preventive type had limited influence on choice. Longer protection, protection starting at birth or the beginning of RSV season, and use for both pre-term and full-term babies were ranked highest in importance (BWS). Pregnant people and HCPs strongly preferred a preventive to protect infants against RSV (vs. none), underscoring the need to incorporate RSV preventives into routine care.
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.