40
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review

      review-article

      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

          Vaccine acceptance depends on public trust and confidence in the safety and efficacy of vaccines and immunization, the health system, healthcare professionals and the wider vaccine research community. This systematic review analyses the current breadth and depth of vaccine research literature that explicitly refers to the concept of trust within their stated aims or research questions. After duplicates were removed, 19,643 articles were screened by title and abstract. Of these 2,779 were screened by full text, 35 of which were included in the final analysis. These studies examined a range of trust relationships as they pertain to vaccination, including trust in healthcare professionals, the health system, the government, and friends and family members. Three studies examined generalized trust. Findings indicated that trust is often referred to implicitly (19/35), rather than explicitly examined in the context of a formal definition or discussion of the existing literature on trust in a health context. Within the quantitative research analysed, trust was commonly measured with a single-item measure (9/25). Only two studies used validated multi-item measures of trust. Three studies examined changes in trust, either following an intervention or over the course of a pandemic. The findings of this review indicate a disconnect between the current vaccine hesitancy research and the wider health-related trust literature, a dearth in research on trust in low and middle-income settings, a need for studies on how trust levels change over time and investigations on how resilience to trust-eroding information can be built into a trustworthy health system.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

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

          The State of Vaccine Confidence 2016: Global Insights Through a 67-Country Survey

          Background Public trust in immunization is an increasingly important global health issue. Losses in confidence in vaccines and immunization programmes can lead to vaccine reluctance and refusal, risking disease outbreaks and challenging immunization goals in high- and low-income settings. National and international immunization stakeholders have called for better monitoring of vaccine confidence to identify emerging concerns before they evolve into vaccine confidence crises. Methods We perform a large-scale, data-driven study on worldwide attitudes to immunizations. This survey – which we believe represents the largest survey on confidence in immunization to date – examines perceptions of vaccine importance, safety, effectiveness, and religious compatibility among 65,819 individuals across 67 countries. Hierarchical models are employed to probe relationships between individual- and country-level socio-economic factors and vaccine attitudes obtained through the four-question, Likert-scale survey. Findings Overall sentiment towards vaccinations is positive across all 67 countries, however there is wide variability between countries and across world regions. Vaccine-safety related sentiment is particularly negative in the European region, which has seven of the ten least confident countries, with 41% of respondents in France and 36% of respondents in Bosnia & Herzegovina reporting that they disagree that vaccines are safe (compared to a global average of 13%). The oldest age group (65+) and Roman Catholics (amongst all faiths surveyed) are associated with positive views on vaccine sentiment, while the Western Pacific region reported the highest level of religious incompatibility with vaccines. Countries with high levels of schooling and good access to health services are associated with lower rates of positive sentiment, pointing to an emerging inverse relationship between vaccine sentiments and socio-economic status. Conclusions Regular monitoring of vaccine attitudes – coupled with monitoring of local immunization rates – at the national and sub-national levels can identify populations with declining confidence and acceptance. These populations should be prioritized to further investigate the drivers of negative sentiment and to inform appropriate interventions to prevent adverse public health outcomes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Presenting quantitative information about decision outcomes: a risk communication primer for patient decision aid developers

            Background Making evidence-based decisions often requires comparison of two or more options. Research-based evidence may exist which quantifies how likely the outcomes are for each option. Understanding these numeric estimates improves patients’ risk perception and leads to better informed decision making. This paper summarises current “best practices” in communication of evidence-based numeric outcomes for developers of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and other health communication tools. Method An expert consensus group of fourteen researchers from North America, Europe, and Australasia identified eleven main issues in risk communication. Two experts for each issue wrote a “state of the art” summary of best evidence, drawing on the PtDA, health, psychological, and broader scientific literature. In addition, commonly used terms were defined and a set of guiding principles and key messages derived from the results. Results The eleven key components of risk communication were: 1) Presenting the chance an event will occur; 2) Presenting changes in numeric outcomes; 3) Outcome estimates for test and screening decisions; 4) Numeric estimates in context and with evaluative labels; 5) Conveying uncertainty; 6) Visual formats; 7) Tailoring estimates; 8) Formats for understanding outcomes over time; 9) Narrative methods for conveying the chance of an event; 10) Important skills for understanding numerical estimates; and 11) Interactive web-based formats. Guiding principles from the evidence summaries advise that risk communication formats should reflect the task required of the user, should always define a relevant reference class (i.e., denominator) over time, should aim to use a consistent format throughout documents, should avoid “1 in x” formats and variable denominators, consider the magnitude of numbers used and the possibility of format bias, and should take into account the numeracy and graph literacy of the audience. Conclusion A substantial and rapidly expanding evidence base exists for risk communication. Developers of tools to facilitate evidence-based decision making should apply these principles to improve the quality of risk communication in practice.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Measuring patients' trust in their primary care providers.

              Existing scales to measure trust in physicians have differing content and limited testing. To improve on these measures, a detailed conceptual model was constructed and a large item pool (n = 78) was generated following a detailed conceptual model and expert review. After pilot testing, the best-performing items were validated with a random national sample (n = 959) and a regional sample of HMO members (n =1,199). Various psychometric tests produced a 10-item unidimensional scale consistent with most aspects of the conceptual model. Compared with previous scales, the Wake Forest physician trust scale has a somewhat improved combination of internal consistency, variability, and discriminability. The scale is more strongly correlated with satisfaction, desire to remain with a physician, willingness to recommend to friends, and not seeking second opinions; it is less correlated with insurer trust, membership in managed care, and choice of physician. Correlations are equivalent with lack of disputes, length of relationship, and number of visits [corrected].
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Hum Vaccin Immunother
                Hum Vaccin Immunother
                KHVI
                khvi20
                Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
                Taylor & Francis
                2164-5515
                2164-554X
                2018
                10 May 2018
                10 May 2018
                : 14
                : 7
                : 1599-1609
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, The Vaccine Confidence Project, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine , Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom
                [b ]Department of Global Health, University of Washington , Seattle, USA
                [c ]Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute , Basel, Switzerland
                [d ]Ipas , Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
                Author notes
                CONTACT Heidi J. Larson heidi.larson@ 123456lshtm.ac.uk London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine , Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom
                [*]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Article
                1459252
                10.1080/21645515.2018.1459252
                6067893
                29617183
                c52ad11b-3246-4f37-b7f0-1924fd834f33
                © 2018 Taylor & Francis

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.

                History
                : 4 January 2018
                : 11 March 2018
                : 26 March 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 76, Pages: 11
                Categories
                Reviews

                Molecular medicine
                trust,confidence,vaccines,vaccination,immunization/immunisation
                Molecular medicine
                trust, confidence, vaccines, vaccination, immunization/immunisation

                Comments

                Comment on this article