ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2024
Are we really hesitant toward routine immunization: Findings from a cross-sectional study in urban area in the tribal dominant state of India.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vaccine hesitancy has been inching up and its root cause lies in the factors that influence the vaccination. The present study was conducted to find out the proportion and factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy for routine childhood vaccinations in the slum population. Methods: A community-based cross-sectional study was carried out among 210 children between the age group of 0 and 59 months residing in the urban slums of Ranchi in 2021. Data were collected during the household visit by interviewing the parents using a predesigned pretested interview schedule which was developed based on the validated version of the vaccine hesitancy survey questionnaire originally developed by the World Health Organization Strategic Advisory Group of Experts' working group on vaccine hesitancy. Associations between variables were analyzed using logistic regression. Results: A total of 210 children whose parents had given consent were included in our study. The majority of the families, 188 (89.5%), were not hesitant while only 22 (10.5%) were vaccine hesitant. Tribal children and unreserved category children had adjusted odds ratio of 4.41 (95% CI, 1.61-45.46) and 7.75 (95% CI, 1.07-56.08) for the delay as against their reference category. Conclusions: Most of the children were vaccinated in our study area and the families have shown confidence in vaccines. Although there were delays in vaccination and the reasons for the delays must be addressed to prevent these vaccine-hesitant populations from turning into vaccine-refusal population. Uniformity in vaccination days in different health facilities in slum areas, appropriate antenatal information, and counseling regarding childhood vaccinations, widespread awareness, and improving mother's education can help address the issue of vaccine hesitancy.
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.