The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Underlying factors impacting vaccine hesitancy in high income countries: a review of qualitative studies
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: While the scientific consensus on the benefits of vaccination is unambiguous, there is a growing proportion of the population that is skeptical about vaccination. The idea that vaccination programs are losing their momentum concerns public health agencies throughout the world. Many studies assessing determinants of vaccine acceptance have been published in the last decade. AREAS COVERED: In this article, we review the existing qualitative literature on parents' attitudes toward childhood vaccination. Studies were included if they: (1) focused on the views, decision-making, or experiences of caregivers (hereafter, referred to as 'parents') regarding vaccinations for young children; (2) used qualitative methods for both data and data analysis; (3) were conducted in countries that ranked 'very high' on the 2016 United Nations Human Development Index; and (4) had been peer-reviewed. Twenty-two (22) studies met our inclusion criteria and were reviewed, using the socio-ecological model as a conceptual framework. EXPERT COMMENTARY: Parental vaccination decisions are complex and multi-dimensional. Experiences, emotions, routine ways of thinking, information sources, peers/family, risk perceptions, and trust, among other factors, inform parents' attitudes and decision-making processes. Further research is needed in order to design evidence-informed responses to vaccine hesitancy appropriate to the setting, context, and hesitant subgroups.
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
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Alonso-Coello, P., & Schünemann, H. J. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.ad · Cited by 23,305
An ecological perspective on health promotion programs
McLeroy, K. R., Bibeau, D., Steckler, A., & Glanz, K. (1988) · Health Education Quarterly · doi:10.1177/109019818801500401 · Cited by 8,502
Vaccine hesitancy: Definition, scope and determinants
MacDonald, N. E. (2015) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.036 · Cited by 5,573
Self-citationSocial Learning Theory and the Health Belief Model
Rosenstock, I. M., Strecher, V. J., & Becker, M. H. (1988) · Health Education Quarterly · doi:10.1177/109019818801500203 · Cited by 5,564 · cited 1×
“The majority of studies conducted to better understand vaccination decision by parents have used quantitative design and were informed by theories such as the Health Belief Model [48] or the Theory of Planned Behavior [49].”
BackgroundEnhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ
Tong, A., Flemming, K., McInnes, E., Oliver, S., & Craig, J. (2012) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-181 · Cited by 3,569
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
Patient Adherence to Tuberculosis Treatment: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research
Munro, S. A., Lewin, S. A., Smith, H. J., Engel, M. E., Fretheim, A., & Volmink, J. (2007) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040238 · Cited by 1,080
Glenton, C., Colvin, C., Carlsen, B., Swartz, A., Lewin, S., Noyes, J., & Rashidian, A. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010414.pub2 · Cited by 454
Vaccine Hesitancy: Clarifying a Theoretical Framework for an Ambiguous Notion
Peretti-Watel, P., Ward, J. K., Schulz, W. S., Verger, P., & Larson, H. J. (2015) · PLoS Currents · doi:10.1371/currents.outbreaks.6844c80ff9f5b273f34c91f71b7fc289 · Cited by 343 · cited 1×
“These authors have proposed to define vaccine hesitancy as a decision-making process that occurs along two axes: the 'level of confidence in the health authorities and mainstream medicine' and 'healthism/risk aversion' [51].”
BackgroundSelf-citation
Cited by
Vaccine hesitancy in the era of COVID-19: could lessons from the past help in divining the future?
Wiysonge, C. S., Ndwandwe, D., Ryan, J., Jaca, A., Batouré, O., Anya, B.-P. M., & Cooper, S. (2022) · Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics · doi:10.1080/21645515.2021.1893062 · Cited by 303
Royal society of Canada COVID-19 report: Enhancing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Canada
MacDonald, N. E., Comeau, J., Dubé, È., Graham, J., Greenwood, M., Harmon, S., McElhaney, J., Meghan McMurtry, C., Middleton, A., Steenbeek, A., et al. (2021) · FACETS · doi:10.1139/facets-2021-0037 · Cited by 42
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Dubé, E., Gagnon, D., MacDonald, N., Bocquier, A., Peretti-Watel, P., & Verger, P.
- Venue
- Expert Review of Vaccines
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-11-02
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 989-1004
- ISSN
- 1476-0584 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-8395
- OpenAlex
- W2898478045
- Cited by
- 220
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 19.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Underlying factors impacting vaccine hesitancy in high income countries: a review of qualitative studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/14760584.2018.1541406
- The paper
- Dubé, E., Gagnon, D., MacDonald, N., Bocquier, A., Peretti-Watel, P., & Verger, P. (2018). Underlying factors impacting vaccine hesitancy in high income countries: a review of qualitative studies. Expert Review of Vaccines. https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2018.1541406
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.
