SynthesisGlobal health action2026
Vaccine preferences and their role for vaccine confidence and uptake: a meta-ethnography.
Synthesis in Global health action, 2026. 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.
- Real-world safety data of human papillomavirus vaccines after marketing in Shandong, China, August 2017-October 2025.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vaccine confidence and uptake are influenced by individuals' preferences regarding vaccine composition, quality, or administration pathways. However, literature synthesizing available qualitative insights into individuals' vaccine preferences remains limited. We therefore conducted a meta-ethnographic systematic review of the qualitative literature on vaccine preferences to identify opportunities for enhancing vaccine confidence and uptake. We implemented a comprehensive search strategy and screened 5,528 studies across seven research databases published between 2001 and 2023. We identified and synthesized 97 qualitative articles to delineate factors influencing consumers' vaccine preferences. Our findings revealed four primary domains shaping individuals' vaccine preferences: Product, Place, Price, and Promotion. First, individuals' preferences for vaccines often hinge on perceived quality and safety of the product itself, which can, for example, be associated with vaccine brand or origin, especially in the case of novel vaccines. Second, people prioritize convenience in terms of vaccination sites and delivery methods (wanting vaccinations offered at their doorstep or in local peripheral clinics); evidence regarding preferred groups to administer the vaccines was mixed. Third, the price of vaccines and the secondary costs associated with vaccination played a role in uptake considerations. Finally, both the sources of information (such as healthcare workers, community volunteers, and religious authorities) and the methods of promoting vaccine information (including face-to-face consultations during clinic visits and the distribution of leaflets or banners), emerged as crucial factors shaping decision-making processes. Overall findings highlight the importance of addressing multifaceted preferences to enhance vaccine confidence and uptake. By understanding individuals' vaccine preferences, strategic recommendations can be developed to optimize vaccination programs and ensure acceptability and utilization.
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.