Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39396966›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024

What makes patients tick? Vaccine preferences against tick-borne encephalitis in four European countries.

Charlotta Zacharias, Ralph Torgler, Jennifer Cummins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Charlotta ZachariasVaccinDirekt Sverige AB, Slussplan 7, Stockholm, 111 30, Sweden.
Ralph TorglerBavarian Nordic Switzerland AG, Grafenauweg 8, Zug, CH-6301, Switzerland. rato@bavarian-nordic.com.
Jennifer CumminsBavarian Nordic Switzerland AG, Grafenauweg 8, Zug, CH-6301, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe explored vaccine motivation and preferences for tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) vaccine attributes among participants in TBE-endemic countries in Europe.

methodsAn online survey was conducted among the general public in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, and Sweden. Participants were ≥ 18 years old, open to receiving vaccines, and living in, or regularly traveling to, TBE-endemic regions in the aforementioned countries. Participants were asked about their general vaccine knowledge and motivations for vaccination, before rating the importance of TBE vaccine attributes, such as efficacy, safety, dosing schedule, and booster interval. Thereafter, participants were shown three hypothetical TBE vaccine profiles with different combinations of attributes. Assuming equal efficacy and safety, participants were asked to select their preferred profile from 12 screens as part of a discrete-choice conjoint analysis. Utility scores were calculated to show the importance of each attribute. Data are presented for the overall survey group and by age and gender, using t-tests to compare means.

resultsFor 73% of participants (n = 1003/1379), self-protection was among the top three reasons to get vaccinated. Disease severity, protection of children or family, and advice or recommendation from a doctor/healthcare professional (HCP) were top three reasons for over half of participants. The majority (58-69%) agreed or strongly agreed that they trust their doctor/HCP on the subject of vaccines, they rely on their doctor/HCP's vaccine knowledge, and they prefer their doctor/HCP to make recommendations on which vaccines they or their families should take. Efficacy and safety were the most important standalone TBE vaccine attributes; however, among TBE vaccine profiles including 3-, 5- and 10-year booster intervals, the 10-year booster interval was the most influential attribute level when choosing a preferred vaccine profile (utility score: 0.58 [standard error: 0.01]). Differences in motivators and preferences were observed between age and gender subgroups.

conclusionThe high level of doctor/HCP reliance highlights the key role doctors/HCPs play in influencing vaccine decision-making. Booster interval was the biggest driver of choice when selecting a hypothetical TBE vaccine profile, with the strongest preference for a 10-year booster interval. These findings could be used to inform TBE vaccination recommendations and in the further development of TBE vaccines.

Indexed as

Encephalitis, Tick-BorneVaccinationViral VaccinesAdolescentAdultAgedAustriaEuropeFemaleGermanyHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient PreferenceSurveys and QuestionnairesViral VaccinesDiscrete-choicePatient choicePatient preferencePatient supportTick-borne encephalitisTick-borne encephalitis vaccineVaccine attributeVaccine booster interval

Identifiers

PMID39396966
PMCPMC11472448

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.