Global search

Find data and evidence

Type at least 2 characters. Use arrow keys to review and Enter to open.

Peer reviewedOpen accessTick-borne encephalitis

Tick-borne encephalitis vaccination coverage among outdoor workers in Sweden: a nationwide survey

Vaccine·

Anna Omazic, Junwen Guo

DOI
10.1016/j.vaccine.2026.128593
PMID
42001738
PMCID
OpenAlex
W7154907570
Study type
Cross-sectional study
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Article type
journal-article
Integrity
current

Why this research matters now

Rising regional disease incidence contrasts with the exclusion of the prophylactic agent from official immunization schedules, highlighting the need for occupational-specific interventions and financial support mechanisms to mitigate transmission risk.

01

Structured evidence summary

Research question

The investigation aimed to quantify tick-borne encephalitis immunization rates among Swedish individuals employed in outdoor occupations, addressing a documented gap in existing epidemiological data.

Study design

Researchers utilized a nationwide cross-sectional survey methodology to collect self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and practice data during 2024.

Population and setting

The analytical sample comprised 1006 consenting adults working in outdoor sectors such as agriculture, forestry, hunting, scientific research, and wildlife guiding across Sweden.

Main findings

Participants exhibited moderate awareness and positive views regarding immunization, yet actual uptake rates fell short of these metrics and differed markedly across demographics. Female respondents achieved higher assessment scores and vaccination rates than males, while geographic analysis revealed superior coverage in southern and central counties relative to northern areas. Roughly seventy percent indicated completion of a three-dose regimen, although distinct demographic clusters remained largely unprotected.

Public-health relevance

Rising regional disease incidence contrasts with the exclusion of the prophylactic agent from official immunization schedules, highlighting the need for occupational-specific interventions and financial support mechanisms to mitigate transmission risk.

Important limitations

The cross-sectional framework restricts temporal analysis of behavioral shifts, and reliance on self-reported immunization records introduces potential recall inaccuracies.

GIDS interpretation

This publication establishes a descriptive baseline for occupational immunization patterns, offering contextual reference points for literature mapping and regional health strategy discussions without implying real-time outbreak tracking.

02

Related GIDS surveillance

Literature context does not validate, explain, or change a surveillance signal. Exact and contextual relationships are shown separately.

03

Evidence relationships

This article has 11 auditable classifier relationships to diseases, places, topics, and study design.

about diseaseaddresses topicaddresses topicaddresses topicevaluates interventionhas pathogen typeinforms policy domainstudied instudied population settingstudies populationuses study design