The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The benefit of the doubt or doubts over benefits? A systematic literature review of perceived risks of vaccines in European populations
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: The success of vaccination strategies depends in part on population perceptions of benefits and risks of vaccines and related confidence in vaccination. Better knowledge of public concerns about vaccines and what is driving them is needed to inform vaccination strategies and communications. This literature reviewer examined studies on vaccine and vaccination risk perceptions and concerns across European populations. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies published between 2004 and 2014 in Europe. A descriptive analysis was performed. FINDINGS: A total of 145 articles were selected, most of which were conducted in the UK, the Netherlands and France and studied seasonal influenza, HPV and pandemic influenza vaccination. Across all countries and vaccines, the primary area of concern was vaccine safety, followed by perceptions of low likelihood of contracting vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), perceived low severity of VPDs, beliefs that vaccines do not work, and overall lack of information. Concerns were found to be vaccine-, country- and population-specific. CONCLUSION: In addition to identifying concerns about vaccination in Europe, this study confirmed the notion that individuals have many safety concerns about vaccination and often believe that the risks of vaccination outweigh their benefits. More research needs to be conducted to explore the impact of different types of communication strategies, which would frame the benefits of vaccination as well as risks of not vaccinating. Strategies to better inform public perceptions of vaccines should include the provision of unbiased, comprehensive information tailored to population information needs, and delivered using multiple and new communication technologies such as social media.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Slovic, P. (1987) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.3563507 · Cited by 9,271
Larson, H. J., Jarrett, C., Eckersberger, E., Smith, D. M. D., & Paterson, P. (2014) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.01.081 · Cited by 2,254 · cited 2×
“Concerns about the risks of vaccination are known to be vaccine-specific and have been shown to vary across countries and population groups [8].”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationStatus-quo and omission biases
Ritov, I., & Baron, J. (1992) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00208786 · Cited by 613
MMR: marginalised, misrepresented and rejected? Autism: a focus group study
Hilton, S., Hunt, K., & Petticrew, M. (2007) · Archives of Disease in Childhood · doi:10.1136/adc.2006.109686 · Cited by 31
Cited by
A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine
Lazarus, J. V., Ratzan, S. C., Palayew, A., Gostin, L. O., Larson, H. J., Rabin, K., Kimball, S., & El-Mohandes, A. (2021) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-020-1124-9 · Cited by 2,904
Self-citationCOVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Worldwide: A Concise Systematic Review of Vaccine Acceptance Rates
Sallam, M. (2021) · Vaccines · doi:10.3390/vaccines9020160 · Cited by 2,128
The how’s and what’s of vaccine reactogenicity
Hervé, C., Laupèze, B., Del Giudice, G., Didierlaurent, A. M., & Tavares Da Silva, F. (2019) · npj Vaccines · doi:10.1038/s41541-019-0132-6 · Cited by 513
Karafillakis, E., Simas, C., Jarrett, C., Verger, P., Peretti-Watel, P., Dib, F., De Angelis, S., Takacs, J., Ali, K. A., Pastore Celentano, L., et al. (2019) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2018.1564436 · Cited by 328
Self-citationImmunization: vital progress, unfinished agenda
Piot, P., Larson, H. J., O’Brien, K. L., N’kengasong, J., Ng, E., Sow, S., & Kampmann, B. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1656-7 · Cited by 206
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Karafillakis, E., & Larson, H. J.
- Venue
- Vaccine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-09
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 37
- Pages
- 4840-4850
- ISSN
- 0264-410X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2742031405
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 3.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The benefit of the doubt or doubts over benefits? A systematic literature review of perceived risks of vaccines in European populations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.07.061
- The paper
- Karafillakis, E., & Larson, H. J. (2017). The benefit of the doubt or doubts over benefits? A systematic literature review of perceived risks of vaccines in European populations. Vaccine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.07.061
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.