Cargando…

COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women/people were identified as an at-risk group of severe COVID-19 disease. Consequently, vaccine uptake among this group became a public health priority. However, the relationship between pregnancy and vaccination decision-making is complex, and the heigh...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jones, Emma, Neely, Eva
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37935170
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daad144
_version_ 1785132058982481920
author Jones, Emma
Neely, Eva
author_facet Jones, Emma
Neely, Eva
author_sort Jones, Emma
collection PubMed
description Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women/people were identified as an at-risk group of severe COVID-19 disease. Consequently, vaccine uptake among this group became a public health priority. However, the relationship between pregnancy and vaccination decision-making is complex, and the heightened uncertainty and anxiety produced through the pandemic further exacerbated this immunization decision. This study explores COVID-19 vaccination decision-making during pregnancy in Aotearoa New Zealand by using an online story completion survey tool. Ninety-five responses were received and analysed using thematic analysis where ambiguity was a core facet within and across stories. Three ambiguities were identified, including who makes the decision (agential), what the risks are (risk) and how immunity to this threat can be best achieved (immunity). We discuss the implications of this ambiguity and how the strong desire to protect the baby persisted across accounts. The recognition of the rather persistent ambiguity in vaccination decision-making helps conceptualize influencing factors taken into account in a more nuanced manner for further research, public health campaigns and health professionals. Future public health campaigns can consider redistributing responsibility for vaccination decision-making in pregnancy, traverse an either/or perspective of ‘natural’ and ‘artificial’ immunity-boosting and consider how risk is perceived through anecdotes and viral immediacy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10629973
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106299732023-11-08 COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making Jones, Emma Neely, Eva Health Promot Int Article Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women/people were identified as an at-risk group of severe COVID-19 disease. Consequently, vaccine uptake among this group became a public health priority. However, the relationship between pregnancy and vaccination decision-making is complex, and the heightened uncertainty and anxiety produced through the pandemic further exacerbated this immunization decision. This study explores COVID-19 vaccination decision-making during pregnancy in Aotearoa New Zealand by using an online story completion survey tool. Ninety-five responses were received and analysed using thematic analysis where ambiguity was a core facet within and across stories. Three ambiguities were identified, including who makes the decision (agential), what the risks are (risk) and how immunity to this threat can be best achieved (immunity). We discuss the implications of this ambiguity and how the strong desire to protect the baby persisted across accounts. The recognition of the rather persistent ambiguity in vaccination decision-making helps conceptualize influencing factors taken into account in a more nuanced manner for further research, public health campaigns and health professionals. Future public health campaigns can consider redistributing responsibility for vaccination decision-making in pregnancy, traverse an either/or perspective of ‘natural’ and ‘artificial’ immunity-boosting and consider how risk is perceived through anecdotes and viral immediacy. Oxford University Press 2023-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10629973/ /pubmed/37935170 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daad144 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Article
Jones, Emma
Neely, Eva
COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making
title COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making
title_full COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making
title_fullStr COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making
title_full_unstemmed COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making
title_short COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making
title_sort covid-19 vaccination in pregnancy: ambiguity in decision-making
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37935170
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daad144
work_keys_str_mv AT jonesemma covid19vaccinationinpregnancyambiguityindecisionmaking
AT neelyeva covid19vaccinationinpregnancyambiguityindecisionmaking