ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2026
Parental acceptability of new RSV preventive therapies for infants: A cross-sectional survey in Canada.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 5C psychological antecedents of vaccine hesitancy toward maternal RSV vaccines and infant monoclonal antibodies among pregnant and postpartum women and their partners in China: A multicenter, dyadic survey design, cross-sectional study.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Parental Acceptance of Nirsevimab for RSV Prevention in Infants Across Two Consecutive Seasons in Emilia-Romagna, Italy.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Systematic Review: Efficacy, Safety Profile, and Cost-Effectiveness of Nirsevimab Versus Palivizumab for RSV Prevention in Children Under 24 Months.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two new RSV immunization products exist for infants: a prenatal vaccine (RSVpreF) and a long-acting monoclonal antibody for infants (nirsevimab). While both showed promise in clinical trials, implementation has varied across jurisdictions. Before rollout in Canada, we conducted an anonymized, online survey with a nationally representative sample of 1,015 expectant and recent birth parents. The primary outcome was product acceptability (disagree, undecided, agree). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) identified factors associated with agreement or indecision versus disagreement. Approximately 49% (n = 499) were expecting; 51% (n = 516) had a baby in the past year. Overall, 72% (n = 727) agreed to receive a product: 61% (n = 624) for RSVpreF and 60% (n = 608) for nirsevimab. RSVpreF agreement was higher among older parents (e.g., OR = 3.64; 95% CI, 1.99-6.67 for age 25-34 versus 18-24 years), those with a university degree (OR = 3.65; 95% CI, 2.01-6.64 versus high school), higher income (OR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.01-5.28 for ≥$150k versus <$40k), or receipt/intention for Tdap (OR = 3.76; 95% CI, 2.37-5.96 versus no receipt/intention) or influenza (OR = 2.04; 95% CI, 1.29-3.21) vaccines. Agreement was higher among parents of children without a high-risk medical condition compared to those with (OR = 2.32; 95% CI, 1.44-3.72). Similar trends were observed for nirsevimab, with lower agreement also noted among those who self-researched antibodies (OR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30-0.88 versus not). As most respondents rated product safety (76%), effectiveness (71%), and disease severity risk (70%) as important in decision-making, providing clear information on these, alongside communications targeted to subgroups with lower agreement, may optimize uptake as programs rollout.
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.