Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40892804›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Nurses' attitudes about RSV vaccination for pregnant women and infants: Evidence from a cross-sectional survey.

Filip Viskupič, David L Wiltse, Thomas E Stenvig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

3 authors.

Filip ViskupičAssistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1096-325X
David L WiltseProfessor, College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota, United States of America.
Thomas E StenvigAssociate Professor Emeritus, College of Nursing, South Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccines for pregnant women and infants became available in 2023 in the United States. However, the uptake of these vaccines has been low. Nurses play an important role in provider-patient vaccine communication. We conducted a survey on nurses' attitudes about whether pregnant women and infants should receive an RSV vaccination. We distributed a survey to nurses in South Dakota, United States in May 2024. We used multivariate ordered logistic regression to determine the factors influencing nurses' attitudes toward RSV vaccination. We received 1,908 responses; 44% of participants agreed that pregnant women should receive an RSV vaccination, and 72% agreed that infants should do so. The agreement was associated with personal vaccination status, age, education, and partisan self-identification. Among nurses 60 years and older, the agreement was associated with personal RSV vaccination uptake. Participants were more supportive of infants receiving RSV vaccine than pregnant women. The nurses who attained lower education status, did not receive COVID-19 and flu vaccinations, and identified as Republican or independent were less likely to think that pregnant women and infants should receive RSV vaccination. Strengthening provider knowledge about RSV vaccines for pregnant women and infants can help increase RSV vaccine uptake.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelNursesRespiratory Syncytial Virus InfectionsRespiratory Syncytial Virus VaccinesVaccinationAdultCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInfantMaleMiddle AgedPregnancyPregnant PeopleRespiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID40892804
PMCPMC12404496

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.