Development action with informed and engaged societies

After nearly 28 years, The Communication Initiative (The CI) Global is entering a new chapter. 

Following a period of transition, the global website has been transferred to the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) in South Africa, where it will be administered by the Social and Behaviour Change Communication Division. Wits' commitment to social change and justice makes it a trusted steward for The CI's legacy and future. 

On the transfer, co-founder Victoria Martin expressed her pleasure to see this work continue under Wits' leadership, knowing that co-founder Warren Feek (1953–2024) would have felt deep pride in The CI Global's Africa-led direction. 

As Wits, we honour the team and partners who sustained The CI for decades and look forward building from that strong base. This includes co-founders Warren Feek (1953-2024) and Victoria Martin as well as La Iniciativa de Comunicación (CILA), which continues independently at lainiciativadecomunicacion.com with links to The CI Global site. We are also eager to forge new partnerships and entertain new ideas as we consider how best to contribute to social and behaviour change in our rapidly evolving environment.

If you are joining the International Social and Behaviour Change Communication (SBCC) Summit in Panama, please join Wits and CILA on Monday, 22 June, to share your thoughts and suggestion for the relaunch of the Communication Initiative. We will be in Pacifica 5 from 12-1:25 for the Refuel, Reflect, and Renew Lunch Series: The Communication Initiative: celebrating a driving force for Communication for Social Change and the way forward. We will reflect on the legacy of Warren Feek and family in creating the Communication Initiative, consider the contributions of CI over the years and then turn our attention towards the future in this dynamic session. 

If you are unable to join us in Panama, we still want to hear from you. Please contribute your thoughts by following this link: https://redcap.link/CommunicationInitiative2026 or reaching out to ci_surveys@commint.com

You can also follow the QR Code:

 https://redcap.link/CommunicationInitiative2026

Time to read
2 minutes
Read so far

To Vaccinate or not to Vaccinate? Women's Perception of Vaccination in Pregnancy: A Qualitative Study

0 comments
Affiliation

North Dublin City GP Training Programme (O'Shea, McEntee, O'Carroll, O'Reilly); The Rotunda Hospital (Cleary, Barrett, Drew)

Date
Summary

"The qualitative approach gives voice to the thoughts and concerns of women as they make the complex decision to vaccinate in pregnancy."

Vaccination against influenza and pertussis is recommended in pregnancy, but Public Health England estimated that only 40.3% of pregnant women had the seasonal flu vaccine in 2012/2013, with pertussis vaccine uptake at 54% in 2014. Conducted in Dublin, Ireland, this qualitative study gives insight into pregnant women's concerns and influencing factors as they make the choice to vaccinate (or not). This information could be used by healthcare providers involved in maternity care to improve vaccination rates in pregnancy.

Seventeen women aged 23-44 years participated in a semi-structured interview. The majority of women were Irish (n = 12), although there was one Polish, one Nigerian, one Spanish, one Maltese, and one Pakistani participant, reflecting the varying ethnicities admitted to the large maternity hospital. Thirteen of the 17 women had received the influenza vaccine in pregnancy, while only 9 had received the pertussis vaccine.

Three themes emerged:

  1. Healthcare providers influence pregnant women's choice to vaccinate: 12 of the 13 women vaccinated were positively influenced by their general practitioner (GP), midwife, or hospital consultant to have the influenza vaccine. Some women took a passive role in seeking any further information regarding the influenza vaccine once it was recommended to them. Two of the unvaccinated group said they were not offered the vaccine by their healthcare provider. Others among the vaccinated group commented that the vaccine was not stressed enough and that healthcare providers did not engage them in meaningful discussions about vaccination. The women commended the availability of the vaccine at their community GP visits, but they repeatedly commented that it was not discussed enough in the hospital environment - either by the midwives or by their consultant obstetrician. Four women described stories that negatively influenced their decision to vaccinate or caused them to proceed with more caution. Some referred to the bad press surrounding certain vaccines, such as the link between the H1N1 vaccine and narcolepsy, and the (completely discredited) link between autism and the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. The story that the vaccine can give you the flu negatively influenced 2 of the unvaccinated group. Family and friends were not seen as a major influence to decision-making about vaccination but were seen to be largely positive.
  2. There is a deficiency in women's knowledge regarding vaccine safety: Women believed there were risks associated with the influenza vaccine but had a poor understanding of what these risks were.
  3. There is a lack of awareness and promotion of pertussis vaccination: Seven women interviewed had never heard of the pertussis vaccine. For many who did receive the vaccine, they explained their healthcare provider was much less involved in giving information on this vaccine compared to the influenza vaccine, and these women sought other sources of information to inform their choice. Several had to engage their healthcare provider in discussion about the vaccine; the women alluded to some ambiguity among healthcare providers over who is responsible for discussing and offering the pertussis vaccine.

In reflecting on the findings, the researchers note that both positions of vaccinating and not vaccinating despite uncertainty were found in this study. Similarly, not all vaccinated and unvaccinated women had engaged in deliberation. This suggests that these findings are not fully explained by health behaviour theories that presume deliberation on pros and cons of vaccination using all sources of information available.

In conclusion, the researchers urge clinicians to be cognizant of the important role they play in advising women to vaccinate in pregnancy. Uptake could be increased by having vaccines available at hospital antenatal clinics in addition to primary care, with staff promoting both the influenza and pertussis vaccines, addressing any concerns women may have, and reassuring them about safety. Given the lack of safety information, the researchers recommend that this be a focus of future media campaigns promoting vaccination in pregnancy.

Source

British Journal of General Practice (BJGP) Open 2018; 2 (2): bjgpopen18X101457. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen18X101457. Image credit: Irish Examiner