Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39944073›Full record

Observational studyFrontiers in public health2025

From classrooms to real-world contexts: enhancing vaccine education through open schooling.

Hannah Kwella, Jana Schilbert, Amélie Tessartz, Annette Scheersoi

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Frontiers in public health, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Hannah KwellaUniversity of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Jana SchilbertUniversity of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Amélie TessartzUniversity of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Annette ScheersoiUniversity of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The topic of vaccination has been a highly debated issue for many years, whether related to measles, HPV, or the recent COVID-19 pandemic. It necessitates deeper exploration, particularly in school biology classes where it is often superficially covered, with ethical considerations rarely addressed. To enable students to engage in an in-depth examination of this complex socio-scientific issue and to enhance their argumentation and decision-making skills, a vaccine educational project was implemented based on the concept of open schooling, where schools collaborate with various societal institutions. Over a three-day interdisciplinary program, secondary school students worked with scientists from diverse fields, including immunobiology, medicine, and ethics, across different career levels, providing varied perspectives. Students actively engaged in real-world learning contexts with authentic problems, fostering individual reflection. A qualitative study, which involved observations and interviews with students, scientists, and teachers, highlighted key success factors in developing student interest and engagement in the topic of vaccination: learner-centered design, interaction with experts, exposure to diverse professional environments, active science learning, and the integration of ethical aspects. This approach promoted not only student engagement with the complex subject matter but also critical thinking and argumentation, contributing to informed decision-making and public health awareness.

Indexed as

Health EducationModels, EducationalStudentsVaccinationAdolescentFemaleHumansIntersectoral CollaborationInterviews as TopicMaleProgram EvaluationQualitative ResearchSchoolsethical aspectsopen schoolingreal-world contextssocio-scientific issuevaccine education

Identifiers

PMID39944073
PMCPMC11814452

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.