35
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The big picture in addressing vaccine hesitancy

      article-commentary

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Public acceptance of vaccination has never been a given. Today there is a set of societal circumstances that may contribute to a growing parental hesitancy about vaccination. These include: increasingly ‘crowded’ vaccination schedules; lower prevalence of vaccine-preventable diseases; greater access to, and more rapid dissemination of, vaccine-critical messages via digital networks; hyper-vigilance of parents in relation to children and risk; and an increasingly consumerist orientation to healthcare.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance

          Evaluating complex interventions is complicated. The Medical Research Council's evaluation framework (2000) brought welcome clarity to the task. Now the council has updated its guidance
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Parents with doubts about vaccines: which vaccines and reasons why.

            The goals were (1) to obtain national estimates of the proportions of parents with indicators of vaccine doubt, (2) to identify factors associated with those parents, compared with parents reporting no vaccine doubt indicators, (3) to identify the specific vaccines that prompted doubt and the reasons why, and (4) to describe the main reasons parents changed their minds about delaying or refusing a vaccine for their child. Data were from the National Immunization Survey (2003-2004). Groups included parents who ever got a vaccination for their child although they were not sure it was the best thing to do ("unsure"), delayed a vaccination for their child ("delayed"), or decided not to have their child get a vaccination ("refused"). A total of 3924 interviews were completed. Response rates were 57.9% in 2003 and 65.0% in 2004. Twenty-eight percent of parents responded yes to ever experiencing >or=1 of the outcome measures listed above. In separate analyses for each outcome measure, vaccine safety concern was a predictor for unsure, refused, and delayed parents. The largest proportions of unsure and refused parents chose varicella vaccine as the vaccine prompting their concern, whereas delayed parents most often reported "not a specific vaccine" as the vaccine prompting their concern. Most parents who delayed vaccines for their child did so for reasons related to their child's illness, unlike the unsure and refused parents. The largest proportion of parents who changed their minds about delaying or not getting a vaccination for their child listed "information or assurances from health care provider" as the main reason. Parents who exhibit doubts about immunizations are not all the same. This research suggests encouraging children's health care providers to solicit questions about vaccines, to establish a trusting relationship, and to provide appropriate educational materials to parents.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A systematic review of interventions for reducing parental vaccine refusal and vaccine hesitancy.

              Unvaccinated individuals pose a public health threat to communities. Research has identified many factors associated with parental vaccine refusal and hesitancy toward childhood and adolescent immunizations. However, data on the effectiveness of interventions to address parental refusal are limited. We conducted a systematic review of four online databases to identify interventional studies. We used criteria recommended by the WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization (SAGE) for the quality assessment of studies. Intervention categories and outcomes were evaluated for each body of evidence and confidence in overall estimates of effect was determined. There is limited evidence to guide implementation of effective strategies to deal with the emerging threat of parental vaccine refusal. There is a need for appropriately designed, executed and evaluated intervention studies to address this gap in knowledge.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Hum Vaccin Immunother
                Hum Vaccin Immunother
                KHVI
                khvi20
                Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
                Taylor & Francis
                2164-5515
                2164-554X
                September 2014
                19 November 2014
                19 November 2014
                : 10
                : 9
                : 2600-2602
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of Sydney; School of Public Health ; New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
                [2 ]National Centre for Immunisation Research & Surveillance; Children's Hospital at Westmead ; New South Wales, Westmead, Australia
                [3 ]La Trobe University; School of Public Health and Human Biosciences; Centre for Health Communication and Participation ; Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Julie Leask; Email: Julie.leask@ 123456sydney.edu.au
                Article
                970948
                10.4161/hv.29725
                4975059
                25483479
                6da7c98c-377b-44b6-96a7-e0ff2edffd04
                © 2014 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The moral rights of the named author(s) have been asserted.

                History
                : 12 June 2014
                : 25 September 2014
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, References: 17, Pages: 3
                Categories
                Commentary

                Molecular medicine
                attitudes to health,communication,evidence based medicine,health services research,psychology

                Comments

                Comment on this article