ArticleVaccine: X2024
A qualitative assessment of influenza vaccine uptake among children in Kenya.
Article in Vaccine: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating Influenza Illnesses Averted by Year-Round and Seasonal Campaign Vaccination for Young Children, Kenya.Emerging infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Influenza is a significant contributor to acute respiratory infections (ARI), and children < 5 years are at increased risk of severe influenza disease. In Kenya the influenza vaccine is not included in the Kenya Expanded Programme on Immunization (KEPI). To inform roll-out of a national influenza vaccination program, we implemented an influenza vaccine demonstration project in Nakuru and Mombasa counties in Kenya from 2019 to 2021 and set out to establish factors driving influenza vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among caregivers of children aged 6-23 months. Methods: Using semi-structured questionnaires, we conducted eight focus group discussions among community members and twelve key informant interviews among healthcare workers to elicit both lay and expert opinions. Thematic analysis of the interviews was conducted using the World Health Organization's "3 Cs" model of vaccine hesitancy to determine reasons for acceptance or hesitancy of the influenza vaccine. Results: The influenza vaccine was well received among community members and healthcare workers though concerns were raised. Vaccine hesitancy was fuelled by misconceptions about reasons for introducing the vaccine (confidence), perceptions that influenza was not a serious disease (complacency) and administrative fees required at some facilities (convenience). Despite the use of various advocacy, communication and social mobilisation strategies targeted at educating the community on the influenza disease and importance of vaccination, there remained a perception of inadequate reach of the sensitization among some community members. Contextual factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic affected uptake, and parents expressed concern over the growing number of vaccines recommended for children. Conclusion: Despite lingering concerns, caregivers had their children vaccinated indicating that vaccine hesitancy exists, even among those who accepted the vaccine for their children. Efforts targeted at increasing confidence in and reducing misconceptions towards vaccines through effective communication strategies, are likely to lead to increased vaccine uptake.
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.