ArticleJournal of pediatrics. Clinical practice2025
Factors Influencing Parental Decisions on Respiratory Syncytial Virus Immunoprophylaxis.
Article in Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Regional variation in maternal RSV vaccine access and attitudes across two California cohorts.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Exploring parental awareness and willingness to use monoclonal antibodies for respiratory syncytial virus prevention.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Sociodemographic Factors, Intent-Uptake Disparities, and Nirsevimab Availability in Infant RSV Immunoprophylaxis.Pediatric reports · 2025Article
- Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccination Acceptance: The Importance of Asking "Why?"Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: New respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) immunizations for infants and pregnant mothers recently became available to prevent severe RSV disease in infants. We aimed to determine the primary reasons for parental RSV immunization decisions. We further sought to evaluate the associations between vaccine receipt and source of health care information and trust in one's health care provider. Study design: A convenience sample of parents and guardians of infants were surveyed during the 2023-2024 RSV season in one newborn nursery and three affiliated clinics that are part of an academic health system. Results: Among the 118 respondents, 79 (66.9%) chose to receive an RSV vaccine themselves (n = 42) or consented for infant immunization (n = 37). Thirty-nine (92.9%) parents who consented to maternal vaccination and 35 (87.5%) who consented to infant immunization stated a primary reason was protection for their infant. Among those that did not receive the maternal vaccine, the most common reasons were nonavailability (39.7%) or no provider immunization offer (22.2%). Infant immunoprophylaxis was most commonly refused due to the immunization being too new (66.7%). There were no significant associations between vaccine receipt and reported source of health information or between vaccine receipt and degree of trust in the health care provider. Conclusions: The desire to protect their infant from illness was the primary reason for parental RSV immunization intent, while the primary reasons for not immunizing were lack of availability, lack of provider recommendation, and the perception that the immunizations are too new. Ensuring availability and strong recommendations may improve immunization uptake.
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.