ArticleBritish journal of health psychology2025
Dual decision-making routes for COVID-19 and influenza vaccines uptake in parents: A mixed-methods study.
Article in British journal of health psychology, 2025. 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.
- Dual decision-making routes for COVID-19 and influenza vaccines uptake in parents: A mixed-methods study.British journal of health psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveParental decision-making for children's uptake of a relatively novel vaccine and a more common vaccine could involve different processes. This study aimed to compare the psychological processes and the relative importance of psychological factors influencing parental decision-making for children's seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) and COVID-19 vaccination. DESIGN AND
methodsWe adopted mixed-methods approach. Study 1 was a qualitative study involving 29 parents to explore and compare their decision-making processes for children's SIV and COVID-19 vaccination. In Study 2, data from 632 parents were collected longitudinally; then, machine learning was used to quantify the relative importance of factors identified in Study 1 that were relevant to parents' decision-making for childhood vaccination decisions. Alluvial plots were used to compare the predictability of parents' baseline intention for follow-up children's SIV and COVID-19 vaccination.
resultsStudy 1 revealed that parents used the influenza vaccine as an anchor to assess the COVID-19 vaccine's risks. Decision-making for children's SIV was habitual and rule-based, while for COVID-19 vaccination, it involved more deliberation influenced by negative situational cues like negative news and anecdotal experiences. Study 2 further found that, for COVID-19 vaccination, situation-varying factors including distressed emotional states and affective response to news were significant. While for SIV, past-year vaccination behaviour was a more important factor. Baseline intention reliably predicted children's SIV but not COVID-19 vaccination.
conclusionsThe convergence of qualitative and quantitative data highlighted the distinct decision-making strategies for these two vaccines. Targeting key factors in parental decisions can enhance the effectiveness of future vaccination campaigns.
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.