ArticleBMC health services research2024
What happens at two? Immunisation stakeholders' perspectives on factors influencing sub-optimal childhood vaccine uptake for toddlers in regional and remote Western Australia.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Drivers of Vaccine Uptake for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children to Inform Tailored Strategies: A Qualitative Study Exploring Health Service Provider Perspective.The Medical journal of Australia · 2026Article
- Eligible but missing out: a qualitative study of access to COVID-19 antivirals in Australia.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Barriers and drivers to childhood vaccinations in Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals (FDMN)/Rohingya refugees in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn Western Australia (WA), children aged 24 months living regionally or remotely (non-urban) have suboptimal vaccine uptake. As there has not yet been a systematic approach to understanding the facilitators and barriers to childhood vaccination in regional and remote WA, this study aimed to understand the views of key immunisation stakeholders regarding barriers and solutions.
methodsDrawing on the World Health Organization's "Tailoring Immunization Programmes" approach, we undertook a qualitative study with three forms of data collection: (1) semi-structured interviews with immunisation experts within Australia's immunisation system, (2) a semi-structured focus group with immunisation coordinators and health workers working in regional or remote WA, and (3) member checking with senior staff from WA Health. Data from the interviews and focus group was deductively analysed using the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model on NVivo 20.
resultsThere was no clear consensus on the typical under-vaccinated child in country WA. A range of barriers were identified: lack of awareness of the vaccine schedule, difficult access to vaccination services, a shortage in a workforce able to have meaningful conversations with vaccine hesitant parents, ineffective reminder systems, and the rapid spread of misinformation. Participants described previous efforts used to improve vaccine uptake, and felt the following would improve uptake: better access to vaccine clinics, building capacity of Aboriginal Health Workers, and vaccine reminders.
conclusionThis is the first time the facilitators and barriers to routine childhood vaccine uptake in country WA has been explored. Addressing some of these barriers may see an increase in 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.