Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40249169›Full record

ArticleJournal of health psychology2025

How can the illness risk representation framework be used to explain flu, whooping cough and Covid-19 vaccination uptake amongst pregnant women? A qualitative study.

Jo Parsons, Cath Grimley, Louise Clarke, Sarah Hillman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Jo ParsonsUniversity of Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6542-8492
Cath GrimleyUniversity of Warwick, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2444-9075
Louise ClarkeUniversity Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0009-0003-6949-1469
Sarah HillmanUniversity of Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3560-2074

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To explore how the illness risk representation framework explains vaccination uptake in pregnant women. Pregnant women were recruited via hospitals and community groups. Semi-structured interviews with pregnant women, explored factors influencing vaccination uptake. Findings were analyzed using codebook approach to thematic analysis, and applied to illness risk representation framework (IRR). 43 interviews explored domains of the IRR showing good fit to vaccination beliefs of pregnant women. Identity beliefs focused on feelings of susceptibility to illness, beliefs about Cause related to exposure and prevalence to illness and feelings about immunity, Timeline beliefs included feelings about appropriate times to vaccinate, with some waiting to accept vaccinations. Beliefs about Consequences focused on perceived severity of illness and vaccine novelty, and Control beliefs included effectiveness of vaccinations, adverse effects and attempts to control exposure. Some domains of the IRR fit better than others, with estimates of likelihood and severity contributing to risk appraisals.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesPatient Acceptance of Health CarePregnant PeopleVaccinationWhooping CoughAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicPregnancyQualitative ResearchYoung AdultCOVID-19 VaccinesInfluenza Vaccinesillness risk representationspregnancyqualitativevaccination

Identifiers

PMID40249169
PMCPMC12618723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.