SynthesisBMC public health2026
A systematic review of the determinants of vaccine hesitancy in the UK: Implications for future TB vaccine adoption.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTuberculosis (TB) is a deadly yet vaccine-preventable disease mostly affecting adolescents and adults. Novel TB vaccines are now emerging, particularly for these populations; however, vaccine hesitancy, characterised by delays, doubts or refusal to seek or accept vaccines, poses a challenge for sufficient adoption once these vaccines become available. Thus, this review systematically explored system- and individual-level determinants of vaccine hesitancy among adults in the UK, interpreting implications for the adoption of novel TB vaccines.
methodsFive databases systematically searched for studies from 2020 - 2024 reporting qualitative outcomes on determinants of vaccine hesitancy among people living in the UK. Thematic analysis mapped extracted data onto a framework combining the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) model to explore system-level factors (e.g., vaccine-specific influences) and the Perceptions and Practicalities Approach (PaPA) to explore individual-level factors (e.g., perceptual influences) of vaccine hesitancy. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess study quality.
results29 qualitative and 21 mixed methods studies; 87.5% investigated hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccines. All SAGE themes were identified at the system level, most notably vaccine novelty, the media environment and health system experiences. At individual-level, all PaPA themes emerged, with vaccine-specific beliefs and knowledge most frequently identified. Overall, themes varied across the lifespan, with adolescents influenced mainly by media and social norms, and older adults by safety concerns and trust in health professionals.
conclusionsVaccine hesitancy determinants interacted and were compounded in vulnerable subgroups, while post-pandemic disruptions to TB services may undermine adoption of novel TB vaccines. Addressing these challenges requires multi-level strategies centred on trusted, culturally sensitive communication. Delivery through routine, school and community-based programs aligns with evidence from high-incidence settings and highlights the need for coordinated action by policymakers and healthcare providers.
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.