"Nature Does Things Well, Why Should We Interfere?": Vaccine Hesitancy Among Mothers

Mistrust of the medical profession and higher disgust sensitivity predict parental vaccine hesitancy

Despite overwhelming evidence that vaccines are safe and effective, there has been a rise in vaccine hesitancy and refusal leading to increases in the incidence of communicable diseases. Importantly, providing scientific information about the benefits of vaccines has not been effective in counteracting anti-vaccination beliefs. Considering this, better identification of those likely to be vaccine hesitant and the underlying attitudes that predict these beliefs are needed to develop more effective strategies to combat anti-vaccination movements. Focusing on parents as the key decision makers in their children's vaccination, the aim of this study is to better understand the demographic and attitudinal predictors of parental vaccine hesitancy. We recruited 484 parents using Amazon MTurk and queried their attitudes on childhood vaccination, level of education, age, religiosity, political affiliation, trust in medicine, and disgust sensitivity. We found three main demographic predictors for parental vaccine hesitancy: younger age, lower levels of education, and greater religiosity. We also found vaccine hesitant parents to have significantly less trust in physicians and greater disgust sensitivity. These results provide a clearer picture of vaccine hesitant parents and suggest future directions for more targeted research and public health messaging.

Vaccine hesitancy among parents of preschoolers in Canada: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

The purpose was to synthesize the available literature on what factors influence vaccine hesitancy of parents of preschoolers in Canada.

METHODS

Databases (e.g., CINAHL, PubMed, OVID, Proquest) were searched for relevant research articles produced between January 2009 and October 2019. Articles were required to examine vaccine uptake in children aged 0-7, in the English language, and focused within a Canadian context. Articles were excluded if they focused on uptake of the influenza vaccine and if the study population was children with chronic health conditions. A total of 367 articles were reviewed and 12 met the criteria for inclusion in this review.

SYNTHESIS

This review found that between 50% and 70% of children are completely vaccinated at 2 years old, with up to 97% having received at least one vaccine, and 2-5% receiving no vaccines. This review found that trust and access to health care providers is significantly associated with vaccine uptake, likely more important than parents' vaccine knowledge, and may compensate for challenges related to socio-economic status and family dynamics.

CONCLUSION

Vaccine programs need to be created that are accessible to all families, with an awareness of the significant impact of trust on vaccine uptake. Future research should include consistent measures of vaccine uptake, and data from First Nation communities, and should examine how increased trust between health care providers and parents of preschool children would increase vaccine uptake in Canada.

Factors contributing to parental 'vaccine hesitancy' for childhood immunisations

Childhood immunisations have contributed to saving millions of lives worldwide. However, a growing number of parents are declining immunisations, while other parents are choosing to delay them or opting for selective immunisations. These behaviours contribute to the reduction of herd immunity and to the possible resurgence of certain diseases. The aim of this extended literature review was to investigate factors that contribute to 'vaccine hesitancy' for childhood immunisation among parents. Seven qualitative studies were included in the review and examined using thematic analysis. The main themes identified were vaccine safety, effectiveness of vaccines and healthcare factors, which suggest that vaccine hesitancy is more complex than parents simply agreeing or disagreeing for their child to be immunised. A range of factors contribute to vaccine hesitancy and patients' decisions are highly influenced by their perceived need to research information about immunisation online. Healthcare professionals involved in childhood immunisations need to be aware of these factors and behaviours that attribute to vaccine hesitancy to enhance their professional practice.

Social Causes of Vaccine Rejection-Vaccine Indecision Attitudes in the Context of Criticisms of Modernity

As most of the diseases that ravaged human collectivities through millennia have been cured by scientific tools offered to the use of medicine particularly from the Industrial Revolution onwards, vaccination played a crucial role in it. Once conceived as a significant public function, vaccination has been one of the most salient signs of regulatory and social reformist state power. However, together with the rise of globalization and the general state of fluidity stemming from it, on the one hand, communication technology has diffused diverse information around the world, particularly the false ones, and on the other hand, a widespread critical climate against modern conceptions has been formed. In this context of complex reality, vaccination has lost its undoubted public function and meaning. Since 1990s in the world and 2000s in Turkey, we observe a significant, though proportionally still meagre, tendency of refusal or hesitation concerning vaccines, mostly among parents. We analyze this tendency as complex assemblage of causes, both in economic and philosophical dimensions, a multiplex phenomenon which should be understood essentially in a general framework of critique against modernity.

Optimizing communication material to address vaccine hesitancy

Vaccine hesitancy (the reluctance to accept recommended vaccines) is a complex issue that poses risk communication challenges for public health authorities and clinicians. Studies have shown that providing too much evidence on vaccine safety and efficacy to those who are vaccine-hesitant has done little to stem the growth of hesitancy-related beliefs and fears. The objective of this paper is to describe good practices in developing communication materials to address vaccine hesitancy. An inventory of vaccination communication materials in Canada was assessed according to the Council of Canadian Academies Expert Panel on Health Product Risk Communication Evaluation (2015). Many of the current communication products could be improved to better align with evidence-based risk communication best practices. Five best practices were identified. First, identify target audience and establish trust. Second, provide both the risks and benefits of vaccination, as most people are looking for balanced information. Third, give the facts before addressing the myths. Fourth, use visual aids. Fifth, test communication material prior to launch. Applying these best practices to current or future communication products will help vaccine providers (including physicians, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, public health professionals) to develop communication materials that are sensitive to the complex ways that people process and value information and thus more likely to optimize vaccine uptake in their communities.

Factors affecting the vaccination choices of pregnant women for their children: a systematic review of the literature

In recent years, an increase in vaccine hesitancy has led to a decrease in vaccination coverage in several countries. We conducted a systematic review of studies that assessed knowledge of and attitudes toward pediatric vaccinations, and the vaccination choices and their determinants among pregnant women. A total of 6,277 records were retrieved, and 16 full texts were included in the narrative synthesis. The published literature on the topic shows that, overall, pregnant women believe that vaccines are important for the protection of their children and the community, but various concerns and misunderstandings persist around vaccine safety and efficacy, which reduce the trust of expectant mothers in immunization. Nevertheless, such attitudes and choices vary depending on the vaccine being considered and the corresponding determinants should therefore be studied in the context of each specific vaccination. Further research on this topic is needed, particularly in non-western countries.

A meta-synthesis study of the key elements involved in childhood vaccine hesitancy

OBJECTIVES

Immunization is one of the most successful and cost-effective interventions to improve health outcomes. However, internationally, the phenomenon of parental vaccine hesitancy is increasing and presents a growing challenge for health professionals. This article summarizes the evidence surrounding childhood vaccine hesitancy from the perspective of parents.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

METHODS

We searched for qualitative research articles in electronic databases from inception to March 2018. In addition, a manual search of the retrieved articles and their references was conducted to identify other potential articles. We used the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme to examine study validity, adequacy and potential applicability of the results. No articles were excluded for reasons of quality. By performing a meta-synthesis, we identified descriptive themes and, subsequently, the conceptual elements of vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS

The review included 27 studies involving a total of 1557 parents who were hesitant about vaccinating their child. Five overarching categories were identified: (1) risk conceptualization; (2) mistrust towards vaccine-related institutions, pharmaceutical companies, researchers, health professionals and the information from media; (3) parental alternative health beliefs about childhood immunity, vaccine scheduling and the perceived toxicity of vaccinations; (4) philosophical views on parental responsibility; and (5) parents' information levels about vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare providers need to approach this difficult situation considering that parents desire to do what they feel right for the child. Understanding the core elements of hesitancy will allow health professionals to adopt effective communication and behavioural strategies.

Using classification and regression tree analysis to explore parental influenza vaccine decisions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Influenza poses a public health threat for children and adults. The CDC recommends annual influenza vaccination for children <18 years, yet vaccine uptake remains low for children (57.9%) and adults (37.1%). Given that parental decision-making is key in childhood vaccine uptake, there is a critical need to understand vaccine hesitancy among parents who decide not to vaccinate their children. This study aims to explore predictors of children's influenza vaccine status given parental vaccination status and examine the factors that contribute to concordance or discordance between parental and children's vaccine uptake.

METHODS

Classification and regression tree (CART) analyses were used to identify drivers of parental decisions to vaccinate their children against influenza. Hierarchy and interactions of these variables in predicting children's vaccination status were explored.

RESULTS

From a nationally representative sample of non-Hispanic Black and White parents who completed an online survey (n = 328), the main factors influencing parents' decisions to vaccinate their children were vaccine behavior following physician recommendation, knowledge of influenza recommendations for children, influenza vaccine confidence and disease risk. Among unvaccinated parents, the greatest concordance was observed among parents who usually do not get vaccinated following physician recommendation and had lower knowledge of recommendations for influenza vaccination for children. The greatest discordance was observed among unvaccinated parents who had lower hesitancy about recommended vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding drivers of parental decisions to vaccinate themselves and their children can provide insights on health communication and provider approaches to increase influenza vaccine coverage and prevent influenza related mortality.

Getting Involved with Vaccination. Swiss Student Teachers’ Reactions to a Public Vaccination Debate

Vaccination is an explicit topic of the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The present article explores a new way of involving student teachers into the vaccination debate. To this aim, 273 students at a Swiss university for teacher education were invited to read a debate between a vaccination proponent and a vaccination opponent that had been published in a free local newspaper. Then, they were asked to judge five of the main arguments of each discussant and to take a (hypothetical) general decision in favor or against vaccination. This decision, the judgements, and students’ comments were investigated with a mixed method approach in order to better understand the students’ needs and to refine the new approach. It was found that the students eagerly took part in the intervention, but that they were very ambivalent concerning the arguments. They could be classified into three groups. Two groups, called the acceptors and the rejectors, supported the proponent and the opponent, respectively, and decided accordingly in favor or against vaccination. However, there remained a considerably large group that was called the hesitators. They were particularly ambivalent towards both types of argumentation, but, as structural equation modelling revealed, they eventually were more influenced by the arguments in favor than by those against vaccination. In their comments, these students wanted to know more about the prevented diseases, and they often referred to their personal experience but not to the experts’ arguments. It was concluded that this group would benefit most from the new type of intervention. A shared-decision approach, as is today prominently discussed in medicine, could improve its impact, and ways should be found to more seriously and consistently include empathetic understanding in pedagogical settings—for example, by adapting the three-step model from medicine or the reflective equilibrium approach from applied ethics.

Exploring parents' reasons for incomplete childhood immunisation in Indonesia

INTRODUCTION

Immunisation is one of the most successful interventions for controlling infectious diseases but relies on continuous high coverage. Parental vaccine refusal and logistical barriers to access are threats to the success of immunisation programs, with resultant population immunity gaps leading to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. In Indonesia, coverage of childhood vaccines is suboptimal, with poor coverage of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine leading to a large diphtheria outbreak in 2017.

METHODS

To explore the underlying parents' reasons for incomplete childhood immunisation in Indonesia, semi-structured interviews were conducted in Tangerang Selatan, Banten Province, Indonesia. Sixteen purposively selected primary carers of partially and unimmunised children were interviewed. Transcripts were coded and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Parental reasons were categorised into three interrelated themes of belief barriers, safety concerns, and issues of trust and misinformation. Stark differences were evident in reasons provided by carers of unimmunised children compared to partially immunised children. For parents of unimmunised children, Islamic beliefs, belief in the strength of natural immunity, and the use of alternative medicines strongly influenced behaviours. Safety concerns, issues of trust including distrust in the government, misinformation, and trust in information obtained through social networks were also prominent. In contrast, concerns about mild side-effects and logistical barriers outweighed beliefs among carers of partially immunised children.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the complexities in decision making for parents who decide not to vaccinate their children. In the Indonesian context, public health education and engagement of religious leaders to bridge the gap between religious beliefs and vaccine acceptance are needed to address vaccine refusal. Future research on the influence of social networks on vaccine hesitancy in the Indonesian context is also warranted. For parents of partially vaccinated children, interventions should focus on barriers of access to community health staff to encourage timely schedule completion.

Promoting vaccination in maternity wards ─ motivational interview technique reduces hesitancy and enhances intention to vaccinate, results from a multicentre non-controlled pre- and post-intervention RCT-nested study, Quebec, March 2014 to February 2015

BackgroundMany countries are grappling with growing numbers of parents who delay or refuse recommended vaccinations for their children. This has created a need for strategies to address vaccine hesitancy (VH) and better support parental decision-making regarding vaccination.AimTo assess vaccination intention (VI) and VH among parents who received an individual motivational-interview (MI) based intervention on infant immunisation during post-partum stay at a maternity ward between March 2014 and February 2015.MethodsThis non-controlled pre-/post-intervention study was conducted using the results from parents enrolled in the intervention arm of the PromoVaQ randomised control trial (RCT), which was conducted in four maternity wards across the Province of Quebec. Participants (n = 1,223) completed pre- and post-intervention questionnaires on VI and VH using Opel's score. Pre-/post-intervention measures were compared using McNemar's test for categorical variables and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous variables.ResultsPre-intervention: overall VI was 78% and significantly differed across maternity wards (74%, 77%, 84%, 79%, p = 0.02). Post-intervention: VI rose significantly across maternity wards (89%, 85%, 95%, 93%) and the overall increase in VI was 12% (78% vs 90%, p < 0.0001). VH corroborated these observations, pre- vs post-intervention, for each maternity ward (28% vs 16%, 29% vs 21%, 27% vs 17%, 24% vs 13%). Overall, VH was curbed post-intervention by 40% (27% vs 16%; p < 0.0001).ConclusionsCompared with pre-intervention status, participants who received the MI-based intervention on immunisation displayed lower hesitancy and greater intention to vaccinate their infant at 2 months of age.

'I Think I Made The Right Decision … I Hope I'm Not Wrong'. Vaccine hesitancy, commitment and trust among parents of young children

During the last decade, public health research has emphasised the growing public disaffection with vaccination. This contemporary vaccine hesitation (VH) refers to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines, as well as agreement despite doubt and reluctance. We investigated VH among French parents of young children, with an emphasis on two key features of VH: trust towards physicians and commitment to vaccination issues. We targeted two populations with contrasting socioeconomic profiles, using in-depth interviews (n = 25). Most parents exhibited some kind of VH, with differentiated attitudes across vaccines, including acceptance despite enduring doubts, especially for vaccines already provided to older siblings ('vaccine inertia'). Despite the rise of the Internet and social media, our participants still strongly relied on face-to-face interactions with peers and significant others. Most participants trusted their own physician but this was the result of a selection process: they had engaged resources to find a physician they could trust. Participants with contrasted socioeconomic profiles struggled with the same dilemmas, and they committed themselves to the same quest to find the 'right' physician. Nevertheless, parents with a higher socioeconomic status were able to engage more resources and use a wider repertoire of actions, and they also displayed greater health literacy.

Development of motivational interviewing skills in immunization (MISI): a questionnaire to assess MI learning, knowledge and skills for vaccination promotion

Objective: Vaccine hesitancy is a complex problem. We previously demonstrated that motivational interviewing (MI) could be helpful to enhance parents' motivation to vaccinate their child. The aim of this study is to develop a new, simple and robust evaluation tool that is suitable for evaluating MI learning of vaccination health professionals. Methods: We designed the Motivational Interviewing Skills in Immunization (MISI), a short written questionnaire to evaluate the MI knowledge and skills of participants in an immunization context. It covers three key areas: knowledge of MI, ability to apply MI-related skills, participant self-confidence in using MI. Questionnaire content and face validity were assessed by MI experts and internal consistency, reliability and effect size were analyzed using a multiple pretest-posttest design. Results: Psychometric measures showed good to excellent internal consistency of the questionnaire for all three areas (Cronbach's and KR coefficient: 0.70 to 0.88). Test-retest reliability showed good measurement stability (ICC: 0.53). Good sensitivity to change was also obtained (Cohen's d: 0.80 to 1.66). Conclusion: The MISI questionnaire is the first paper/pencil evaluation method to assess MI training specific to immunization. Psychometric measures showed high reliability. Practice implications: This questionnaire could provide a convenient and inexpensive method to evaluate knowledge and competencies following immunization-specific MI training.

Vaccine Information Sources and Parental Trust in Their Child's Health Care Provider

BACKGROUND

Parental trust in their child's health care provider and the number and type of vaccine information sources are important dimensions of vaccine hesitancy and may suggest intervention components for future research.

METHOD

We conducted secondary analysis of survey data from mothers of healthy newborns in Washington State, and examined the association between parental trust in their child's health care provider and vaccine information sources.

RESULTS

We found that mothers with less trust in their child's health care provider used more sources, more informal sources, and were less likely to consider their child's pediatrician their main source of vaccine information compared with more trusting mothers. However, less trusting mothers did not report more effort to read or watch stories about vaccines than more trusting mothers, nor were they more likely to report the internet as their main vaccine information source.

CONCLUSIONS

Future interventions seeking to reduce parental vaccine hesitancy should consider intervention components focused on building or improving parent trust in their child's health care provider.

Determinants of vaccine hesitancy in Quebec: a large population-based survey

Objectives: Vaccine hesitancy is a global phenomenon that needs to be measured and addressed. This study aimed to identify the determinants of vaccine hesitancy among a large regional population.Methods: A structured telephone survey was administered to a random digit sample in Quebec's Eastern Townships region. In addition to socioeconomic information, respondents were asked questions on several health topics such as knowledge and beliefs about immunization, medical consultations, health status, and life habits. Data were weighted according to age, sex, and territories. Statistically significant variables in the univariate analysis were introduced into a multivariate logistic regression model to determine independent factors for vaccine hesitancy (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] and 95% confidence intervals).Results: A total of 8,737 interviews were conducted (participation rate 48.3%). Among all respondents, 32.2% were vaccine-hesitant. Several beliefs were significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy: belief that children receive too many vaccines (aOR = 2.72; 2.32-3.18), belief that a healthy lifestyle can eliminate the need for vaccination (aOR = 2.48; 2.09-2.93), and belief that the use of alternative medicine practices can eliminate the need for vaccination (aOR = 1.39; 1.16-1.68). Other determinants associated with vaccine hesitancy were having consulted a massage therapist (aOR = 2.34; 1.46-3.75), not being vaccinated against influenza (aOR = 1.80; 1.49-2.16), having a low (<$30,000) (aOR = 1.58; 1.24-2.02) or moderate ($30,000-$79,000) (aOR = 1.37; 1.12-1.67) household income, distrust in public health authorities (aOR = 1.40; 1.21-1.63), perceived insufficient knowledge about immunization (aOR = 1.26; 1.04-1.51), and smoking (aOR = 1.22; 1.01-1.47).Conclusions: Many determinants are related to vaccine hesitancy. These determinants should be taken into account when health professionals engage with vaccine-hesitant individuals.

A complementary approach to the vaccination promotion continuum: An immunization-specific motivational-interview training for nurses

AIM

To develop and validate immunization-specific motivational-interview (MI) training for immunization nurses.

BACKGROUND

We previously demonstrated that a MI-based intervention on immunisation, performed during postpartum by MI-trained healthcare workers at the hospital maternity ward, reduced parental vaccine hesitancy (VH) and increased vaccine coverage of their children. In this study, we propose immunization-specific MI training for immunization nurses. Together, MI-based training and interventions provide complementary approaches to existing strategies along the vaccination promotion continuum.

DESIGN

Multiple pretest/posttest design with questionnaires self-administered before and after each training days (4 time points).

METHODS

We developed an in-person immunization-specific MI-training workshop for immunization nurses, held on two days three months apart, with 7 h of MI-training dispensed on day 1, and 4 h on day 2. The self-administered Motivational Interviewing Skills in Immunization (MISI) questionnaire was used at four time points (before and after each of the 2 training days) to evaluate three core aspects of participant MI training: (1) MI-knowledge acquisition; (2) MI-skills application and (3) self-rated self-confidence in applying MI knowledge and skills in vaccination clinical practice. Between November 2016 to December 2017, 34 immunization nurses enrolled in our MI-training workshops.

RESULTS

The immunization-specific MI-training improved the three core areas evaluated in participants i.e. MI-knowledge acquisition, MI-skills application, and self-rated self-confidence in applying these in vaccination clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Our immunization-specific MI-training enabled immunization nurses to significantly improve MI knowledge, skills and self-confidence in applying MI in the clinic. These results, taken together with those on the MI-based intervention for parents that we previously reported, support the notion of proposing validated immunization-specific MI training for immunization nurses in order to curb parental VH.

IMPACT

Immunization-specific MI-training would be easily amenable for the training of other health professionals in the field of immunization to help promote vaccination and curb parental VH.

Vaccine Hesitancy in Pediatric Primary Care Practices

Understanding how pediatric practices handle parental vaccine hesitancy is important as it impacts the efficiency and effectiveness of pediatric practices. In total, 21 semi-structured interviews with pediatric practice staff within a primary care network were conducted between May 2012 and March 2013. Thematic analysis focused on the barriers and challenges of vaccine hesitancy and strategies to reduce the burden at the practice level. Barriers and challenges of vaccine hesitancy included time constraints, administrative challenges, financial challenges and strained patient-provider relationships. Strategies to minimize the burden of vaccine hesitancy included training for vaccine counseling, screening for vaccine hesitancy prior to immunization visits, tailored vaccine counseling, and primary care provider visits for follow-up immunization. Pediatric practices reported many challenges when caring for vaccine-hesitant families. Multiple strategies were identified to reduce the burden of vaccine hesitancy, which future studies should explore to determine how effective they are in increasing vaccine acceptance in pediatric practices.

Overview of knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, vaccine hesitancy and vaccine acceptance among mothers of infants in Quebec, Canada

BACKGROUND

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is a growing problem. The first step in addressing VH is to have an understanding of who are the hesitant individuals and what are their specific concerns. The aim of this survey was to assess mothers' level of vaccine hesitancy and vaccination knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs.

METHODS

Mothers of newly-born infants in four maternity wards in Quebec (Canada) completed a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire included items to assess VH and intention to vaccinate. VH scores were calculated using the Parents Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) survey. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine variables associated with intention to vaccinate (OR; 95% CI).

RESULTS

Overall, 2645 questionnaires were included in this analysis and 77.5% of respondents certainly intended to vaccinate their infant at 2 months of age. Based on the PACV 100-point scale, 56.4% of mothers had a 0 to ˂30 score (low level of VH); 28.6% had a 30 to ˂50 and 15.0% had a score of 50 and higher (high level of VH).The main determinants of mothers' intention to vaccinate were the perceived importance of vaccinating infants at 2 months of age (OR = 9.2; 5.9-14.5) and a low score of VH (OR = 7.4; 5.3-10.3).

DISCUSSION

Although the majority of mothers held positive attitudes toward vaccination, a large proportion were moderately or highly vaccine hesitant. Mothers' level of VH was strongly associated with their intention to vaccinate their infants, showing the potential detrimental impact of VH on vaccine uptake rates and the importance of addressing this phenomenon.

Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Clinical Practice

Vaccines have had a profound impact on public health; however, parents are increasingly refusing or delaying vaccines for their children. Population-based studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Pediatricians should be well informed about vaccine development, safety, and efficacy to inspire parental confidence in vaccines. Systemic challenges in discussing and providing immunizations exist. Discussions about immunizations may be lengthy and time spent discussing immunizations is not routinely reimbursed. Adolescents may be inadequately immunized because they do not routinely present for preventive health visits. Routine immunizations should be offered and discussed at sick visits, particularly for adolescents. Improving immunization rates requires a multifaceted approach. [Pediatr Ann. 2018;47(9):e366-e370.].

Exploring reasons for vaccine-hesitancy among higher-SES parents in Perth, Western Australia

ISSUES ADDRESSED

The increasing prevalence among higher-socioeconomic (higher-SES) parents in Perth, Western Australia (WA), to be vaccine-hesitant (VH) is placing herd immunity at risk.

METHODS

Eighteen one-on-one interviews were conducted; (n = 11) parents who earned >$125 000 pa and expressed ever having concerns surrounding vaccination; (n = 7) health care professionals (HCPs), who provided clinical services. Using grounded theory methodology, data were analysed by constant coding and comparison until themes emerged and an explanatory model was developed.

RESULTS

Four main areas leading to vaccine-hesitancy emerged from the data: We are Educated; We Control our Health; Safe from Disease, At Risk from Vaccines; and What We Want. Parents believed themselves capable of making good vaccination decisions based on their higher education levels and self-sourced vaccination information, yet frequently sought reassurance. Healthism concepts were adopted and parents believed lifestyle factors could control for vaccine-preventable diseases (VPD). Risk perception of disease was low and influenced by the remote geographic location of Perth, whilst perceived negative consequences of vaccination were high. A reduced concept of the social responsibility for vaccination and understanding of herd immunity emerged. Parents called for vaccine contents to be listed and requested more information on why vaccination was necessary.

CONCLUSION

Four areas of VH emerged and reflected parents' belief that higher educational and socioeconomic status, previous successes in life and where they live would result in positive health outcomes and reduce the risk of contracting VPDs. SO WHAT?: This study provides new research into the perceptions among higher-SES VH parents who live in Perth, WA. It provides a model that fills a significant gap in information that could be used effectively for future health promotion interventions.

Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization

Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation-as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.

The Social Basis of Vaccine Questioning and Refusal: A Qualitative Study Employing Bourdieu's Concepts of 'Capitals' and 'Habitus'

This article is an in-depth analysis of the social nature of vaccine decision-making. It employs the sociological theory of Bourdieu and Ingram to consider how parents experience non-vaccination as a valued form of capital in specific communities, and how this can affect their decision-making. Drawing on research conducted in two Australian cities, our qualitative analysis of new interview data shows that parents experience disjuncture and tugs towards 'appropriate' forms of vaccination behavior in their social networks, as these link to broader behaviors around food, school choices and birth practices. We show how differences emerge between the two cities based on study designs, such that we are able to see some parents at the center of groups valorizing their decisions, whilst others feel marginalized within their communities for their decisions to vaccinate. We draw on the work of philosopher Mark Navin to consider how all parents join epistemic communities that reward compliance and conformity with the status quo and consider what this means for interventions that seek to influence the flow of pro-vaccine information through vaccine-critical social groups.

Midwives' attitudes, beliefs and concerns about childhood vaccination: A review of the global literature

Vaccine hesitancy in industrialised countries is an area of concern. Health professionals play a significant role in parental vaccination decisions, however, to date the role of midwives has not been widely explored. This review sought to describe the attitudes and communication practices of midwives in developed countries towards childhood vaccines. Medline, Cinahl, PsychInfo, Embase and the grey literature were searched. Inclusion criteria were qualitative and quantitative studies reporting midwives' beliefs, attitudes and communication practices toward childhood vaccination. The search returned 366 articles, of which 359 were excluded by abstract. Two additional articles were identified from the grey literature and references, resulting in nine studies from five countries included in the review. Across the studies, the majority of midwives supported vaccination, although a spectrum of beliefs and concerns emerged. A minority expressed reservations about the scientific justification for vaccination, which focussed on what is not yet known rather than mistrust of current evidence. Most midwives felt that vaccines were safe; a minority were unsure, or believed they were unsafe. The majority of midwives agreed that childhood vaccines are necessary. Among those who expressed doubt, a commonly held opinion was that vaccine preventable diseases such as measles are relatively benign and didn't warrant vaccination against them. Finally, the midwifery model of care was shown to focus on providing individualised care, with parental choice being placed at a premium. The midwifery model care appears to differ in approach from others, possibly due to a difference in the underpinning philosophies. Research is needed to understand how midwives see vaccination, and why there appears to be a spectrum of views on the subject. This information will inform the development of resources tailored to the midwifery model of care, supporting midwives in advocating for childhood vaccination.

'The Unhealthy Other': How vaccine rejecting parents construct the vaccinating mainstream

To address the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy and rejection, researchers increasingly recognise the need to engage with the social context of parents' decision-making. This study examines how vaccine rejecting parents socially construct the vaccinating mainstream in opposition to themselves. We analyse qualitative data from interviews with parents in Adelaide, South Australia. Applying insights from Social Identity Theory (SIT), we show how these parents bolster their own sense of identity and self-belief by employing a discourse that casts vaccinators as an Unhealthy Other. We demonstrate how the parents identify vaccination as a marker of parental conformity to the 'toxic practices of mass industrial society', linking it to other ways in which membership of the consumerist mainstream requires individuals to 'neglect their health.' This is explored through themes of appearance, diet, (over) consumption of pharmaceuticals, inadequate parenting values and wilful or misguided ignorance. This construction of the Unhealthy Other elevates the self-concept of vaccine hesitant and rejecting parents, who see themselves as part of an enlightened, but constantly besieged, group of healthy and virtuous parents. It is common for the vaccinating mainstream to present vaccine hesitant and rejecting parents as a group subject to epistemic closure, groupthink, confirmation bias and over-confidence in their own expertise. However, vaccine hesitant and rejecting parents also see mainstream society as a group-a much larger one-subject to the same problems. We suggest the need to mitigate the 'groupness' of vaccination and non-vaccination by extending the practice of vaccination to recognisable practitioners of holistic health.

Mothers' informational needs when deciding to have their newborn infant vaccinated with BCG. A Mixed-methods design

OBJECTIVE

To explore the informational needs of mothers with different levels of education in order to improve counselling about vaccination.

METHODS

In the setting of a large vaccination trial, mothers' assessments and yield of written information in combination with telephone consultations were evaluated in a survey. Furthermore, searching strategies for additional information were investigated. Mothers' perspectives on informational needs were explored in focus group discussions.

RESULTS

Out of 2025 mothers, 95% felt well-informed. Of the 4% not feeling well-informed, there were significantly more mothers with basic schooling and nontheoretical education. There was no correlation between searching for additional information and feeling well-informed. The telephone consultation was found to be very supportive for the decision.

CONCLUSION

The written information was digestible over time. The telephone consultation ensured the mothers' understanding by tailoring and deriving meaning from the information to her special needs. Moreover, it helped the mothers gain an overview of risks and benefits and inspired confidence. These findings indicate that the telephone consultation improved health literacy.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Individual counselling about vaccines is required in addition to information about side effects and accurate instructions on how to react upon them.

Association of moral values with vaccine hesitancy

Clusters of unvaccinated children are particularly susceptible to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease ^1,2 . Existing messaging interventions demonstrate short-term success, but some may backfire and worsen vaccine hesitancy ³ . Values-based messages appeal to core morality, which influences the attitudes individuals then have on topics like vaccination ^4-7 . We must understand how underlying morals, not just attitudes, differ by hesitancy type to develop interventions that work with individual values. Here, we show in two correlational studies that harm and fairness foundations are not significantly associated with vaccine hesitancy, but purity and liberty foundations are. We found that medium-hesitancy parents were twice as likely as low-hesitancy parents to highly emphasize purity (adjusted odds ratio: 2.08; 95% confidence interval: 1.27-3.40). High-hesitancy respondents were twice as likely to strongly emphasize purity (adjusted odds ratio: 2.15; 95% confidence interval: 1.39-3.31) and liberty (adjusted odds ratio: 2.19; 95% confidence interval: 1.50-3.21). Our results demonstrate that endorsement of harm and fairness-ideas often emphasized in traditional vaccine-focused messages-are not predictive of vaccine hesitancy. This, combined with significant associations of purity and liberty with hesitancy, indicates a need for inclusion of broader themes in vaccine discussions. These findings have the potential for application to other health decisions and communications as well.

Visually enhanced education and immunization perceptions in low-income parents

OBJECTIVE

Despite immunizations being an effective health promotion intervention, about 28% of children are not up-to-date on the combined seven-vaccine series by 35 months of age in the United States. Identifying innovative techniques to increase immunization literacy is crucial to the health and well-being of children.

DESIGN AND SAMPLE

Based on the theory of multimedia learning, this study examined whether the use of visually enhanced education (VEE) positively impacted parental perception of immunization effectiveness, perceived knowledge of disease, comfort with immunization decision making, and satisfaction with the provider. Forty parents of infants 4-14 days old that could read English.

INTERVENTION

Parents completed a questionnaire with 12 items in four categories during the initial visit (4-14 days old) before VEE and at the second visit (17-37 days later) after the second VEE session had been completed.

RESULTS

A paired sample t test revealed a significant increase in two of the four categories (i.e., perceived knowledge of the disease [t(37) = 8.73, p = .000] and satisfaction with the provider [t(37) = 2.68, p = .011]. Cohen's effect size value suggested high practical significance in one of the four categories (i.e., perceived knowledge of disease d = 1.31, d = 1.42, d = 1.18, d = 1.05, d = 1.12). Cronbach's alpha for the 12 items was 0.852.

CONCLUSIONS

VEE may be an innovative technique for improving parental immunization health literacy and increasing parent-professional communication about immunizations.

Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization

Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.

What is 'confidence' and what could affect it?: A qualitative study of mothers who are hesitant about vaccines

BACKGROUND

Public confidence in immunization is critical to maintaining high vaccine-coverage rates needed to protect individuals and communities from vaccine-preventable diseases. Recent attention has been placed on factors influencing confidence in vaccination in the US and globally, but comprehensive understanding of what drives or hinders confidence in childhood vaccination is yet to be reached. As such, assessing parents' confidence in childhood vaccination and the ways in which educational materials affect confidence is needed.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to (1) learn how mothers who are hesitant about vaccination characterize confidence in health-related products for young children, including the recommended vaccines; (2) gain insights on what influences vaccine confidence beliefs; and (3) assess whether short, education materials affect parental confidence in childhood vaccinations.

METHODS

Eight moderator-lead focus groups (n=61), stratified by socioeconomic status, were undertaken with mothers of children 5years of age of less who are hesitant about vaccines. Four of the groups were held in the Philadelphia, PA area and four were held in the San Francisco/Oakland, CA area. Three educational material pairs, each consisting of a 2-3min video and an infographic poster about an immunization-related topic, were reviewed and assessed for influence on confidence.

RESULTS

Qualitative data analysis was used to identify overarching themes across the focus groups. Themes, insights, and illustrative quotes were identified and provided for each of the major discussion areas: primary health concerns for young children; confidence beliefs and perceptions, including for recommended vaccines; facilitators and barriers to confidence; and reactions to the educational materials.

CONCLUSIONS

Results provide helpful insights into how mothers who are hesitant about vaccines perceive confidence in childhood vaccines and health-related products, suggestions for how to improve confidence, and support for the value and use of short videos as part of vaccination education efforts. Findings can aid those developing vaccination education materials and resources designed to foster vaccine confidence.

Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is an effective way to prevent serious childhood illnesses, but many children do not receive all the recommended vaccines. There are various reasons for this; some parents lack access because of poor quality health services, long distances or lack of money. Other parents may not trust vaccines or the healthcare workers who provide them, or they may not see the need for vaccination due to a lack of information or misinformation about how vaccinations work and the diseases they can prevent.Communication with parents about childhood vaccinations is one way of addressing these issues. Communication can take place at healthcare facilities, at home or in the community. Communication can be two-way, for example face-to-face discussions between parents and healthcare providers, or one-way, for instance via text messages, posters or radio programmes. Some types of communication enable parents to actively discuss vaccines and their benefits and harms, as well as diseases they can prevent. Other communication types simply give information about vaccination issues or when and where vaccines are available. People involved in vaccine programmes need to understand how parents experience different types of communication about vaccination and how this influences their decision to vaccinate.

OBJECTIVES

The specific objectives of the review were to identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative studies exploring: parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences regarding communication about childhood vaccinations and the manner in which it is communicated; and the influence that vaccination communication has on parents' and informal caregivers' decisions regarding childhood vaccination.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), MEDLINE In-process and Other Non-Index Citations (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EbscoHOST), and Anthropology Plus (EbscoHost) databases for eligible studies from inception to 30 August 2016. We developed search strategies for each database, using guidelines developed by the Cochrane Qualitative Research Methods Group for searching for qualitative evidence as well as modified versions of the search developed for three related reviews of effectiveness. There were no date or geographic restrictions for the search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on the views and experiences of parents and informal caregivers regarding information about vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where information about childhood vaccinations was communicated or distributed.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used maximum variation purposive sampling for data synthesis, using a three-step sampling frame. We conducted a thematic analysis using a constant comparison strategy for data extraction and synthesis. We assessed our confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. High confidence suggests that it is highly likely that the review finding is a reasonable representation of the phenomenon of interest, while very low confidence indicates that it is not clear whether the review finding is a reasonable representation of it. Using a matrix model, we then integrated our findings with those from other Cochrane reviews that assessed the effects of different communication strategies on parents' knowledge, attitudes and behaviour about childhood vaccination.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 studies, mostly from high-income countries, many of which explored mothers' perceptions of vaccine communication. Some focused on the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine.In general, parents wanted more information than they were getting (high confidence in the evidence). Lack of information led to worry and regret about vaccination decisions among some parents (moderate confidence).Parents wanted balanced information about vaccination benefits and harms (high confidence), presented clearly and simply (moderate confidence) and tailored to their situation (low confidence in the evidence). Parents wanted vaccination information to be available at a wider variety of locations, including outside health services (low confidence) and in good time before each vaccination appointment (moderate confidence).Parents viewed health workers as an important source of information and had specific expectations of their interactions with them (high confidence). Poor communication and negative relationships with health workers sometimes impacted on vaccination decisions (moderate confidence).Parents generally found it difficult to know which vaccination information source to trust and challenging to find information they felt was unbiased and balanced (high confidence).The amount of information parents wanted and the sources they felt could be trusted appeared to be linked to acceptance of vaccination, with parents who were more hesitant wanting more information (low to moderate confidence).Our synthesis and comparison of the qualitative evidence shows that most of the trial interventions addressed at least one or two key aspects of communication, including the provision of information prior to the vaccination appointment and tailoring information to parents' needs. None of the interventions appeared to respond to negative media stories or address parental perceptions of health worker motives.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have high or moderate confidence in the evidence contributing to several review findings. Further research, especially in rural and low- to middle-income country settings, could strengthen evidence for the findings where we had low or very low confidence. Planners should consider the timing for making vaccination information available to parents, the settings where information is available, the provision of impartial and clear information tailored to parental needs, and parents' perceptions of health workers and the information provided.

Exploring the Continuum of Vaccine Hesitancy Between African American and White Adults: Results of a Qualitative Study

Vaccine delay and refusal present very real threats to public health. Since even a slight reduction in vaccination rates could produce major consequences as herd immunity is eroded, it is imperative to understand the factors that contribute to decision-making about vaccines. Recent scholarship on the concept of “vaccine hesitancy” emphasizes that vaccine behaviors and beliefs tend to fall along a continuum from refusal to acceptance. Most research on hesitancy has focused on parental decision-making about childhood vaccines, but could be extended to explore decision-making related to adult immunization against seasonal influenza. In particular, vaccine hesitancy could be a useful approach to understand the persistence of racial/ethnic disparities between African American and White adults. This study relied on a thematic content analysis of qualitative data, including 12 semi-structured interviews, 9 focus groups (N=90), and 16 in-depth interviews, for a total sample of 118 (N=118) African American and White adults. All data were transcribed and analyzed with Atlas.ti. A coding scheme combining both inductive and deductive codes was utilized to identify themes related to vaccine hesitancy. The study found a continuum of vaccine behavior from never-takers, sometimes-takers, and always-takers, with significant differences between African Americans and Whites.  We compared our findings to the Three Cs: Complacency, Convenience, and Confidence framework. Complacency contributed to low vaccine acceptance with both races.  Among sometimes-takers and always-takers, convenience was often cited as a reason for their behavior, while never-takers of both races were more likely to describe other reasons for non-vaccination, with convenience only a secondary explanation.  However, for African Americans, cost was a barrier.  There were racial differences in trust and confidence that impacted the decision-making process. The framework, though not a natural fit for the data, does provide some insight into the differential sources of hesitancy between these two populations. Complacency and confidence clearly impact vaccine behavior, often more profoundly than convenience, which can contribute either negatively or positively to vaccine acceptance. The Three Cs framework is a useful, but limited tool to understanding racial disparities. Understanding the distinctions in those cultural factors that drive lower vaccine confidence and greater hesitancy among African Americans could lead to more effective communication strategies as well as changes in the delivery of vaccines to increase convenience and passive acceptance.

Childhood vaccine refusal and hesitancy intentions in Croatia: insights from a population-based study

Considering that programmatic data suggest a recent rise in vaccine refusal in Croatia, this study, first of its kind in Southeast Europe, aimed to estimate the prevalence, and sociodemographic, and sociocultural determinants of childhood vaccine refusal and hesitancy (CVRH) intentions among Croatian adults. Multi-stage stratified population-based survey included 1000 individuals aged 18-88 years (M_age = 47.7, SD = 17.8), of whom 51.7% were women. The outcome, a categorical indicator, distinguished among individuals who would approve vaccinating their children (vaccine accepting), those who would approve some but not all vaccines (vaccine hesitant), and those who would refuse vaccination (vaccine refusing). A sizeable minority of participants was characterized by childhood vaccine refusal (10.6%) and hesitancy intentions (19.5%). In a multivariate assessment controlling for parenthood, the odds of vaccine hesitancy were significantly increased by a younger age (AOR = 1.96-3.03, p < .01). Religiosity (AOR = 1.12, p < .05) and the use of alternative medicine (AOR = 2.85, p < .001) increased the odds of vaccine refusal. However, individual characteristics seem to be relatively poor predictors of CVRH intentions in Croatia. Following the social contagion model, future research should move beyond individual-level approach and take into account social interaction and social network effects.

Countering Vaccine Hesitancy

Immunizations have led to a significant decrease in rates of vaccine-preventable diseases and have made a significant impact on the health of children. However, some parents express concerns about vaccine safety and the necessity of vaccines. The concerns of parents range from hesitancy about some immunizations to refusal of all vaccines. This clinical report provides information about addressing parental concerns about vaccination.

Parental Vaccine Hesitancy in Quebec (Canada)

INTRODUCTION

"Vaccine hesitancy" is a concept frequently used in the discourse around vaccine acceptance. This study aims to contribute to the ongoing reflections on tools and indicators of vaccine hesitancy by providing results of a knowledge, attitudes and beliefs (KAB) survey conducted among parents.

METHODS

Data were collected in 2014 through a computer-assisted telephone interview survey administered to a sample of parents of children aged between 2 months and 17 years of age.

RESULTS

The majority of the 589 parents included in the analyses agreed on the importance of vaccination to protect their children's health and to prevent the spread of diseases in the community. The majority of the parents (81%) reported that their child had received all doses of recommended vaccines and 40% of parents indicated having hesitated to have their child vaccinated. Fear of adverse events and low perceived vulnerability of the child or severity of the disease were the most frequent reasons mentioned by these vaccine-hesitant parents. In multivariate analyses, KAB items remaining significantly associated both with an incomplete vaccination status of the child and parents' vaccine hesitancy were: not thinking that it is important to have the child vaccinated to prevent the spreading of diseases in the community; not trusting the received vaccination information and having felt pressure to have the child vaccinated.

DISCUSSION

Further researches will be needed to better understand when, how and why these beliefs are formed in order to prevent the onset of vaccine hesitancy.

Ethics and Childhood Vaccination Policy in the United States

Childhood immunization involves a balance between parents' autonomy in deciding whether to immunize their children and the benefits to public health from mandating vaccines. Ethical concerns about pediatric vaccination span several public health domains, including those of policymakers, clinicians, and other professionals. In light of ongoing developments and debates, we discuss several key ethical issues concerning childhood immunization in the United States and describe how they affect policy development and clinical practice. We focus on ethical considerations pertaining to herd immunity as a community good, vaccine communication, dismissal of vaccine-refusing families from practice, and vaccine mandates. Clinicians and policymakers need to consider the nature and timing of vaccine-related discussions and invoke deliberative approaches to policy-making.

I Immunise: An evaluation of a values-based campaign to change attitudes and beliefs

This paper presents results of a study determining the efficacy of a values based approach to changing vaccination attitudes. It reports an evaluation survey of the "I Immunise" campaign, conducted in Fremantle, Western Australia, in 2014. "I Immunise" explicitly engaged with values and identity; formulated by locals in a community known for its alternative lifestyles and lower-than-national vaccine coverage rates. Data was collected from 304 online respondents. The campaign polarised attitudes towards vaccination and led some to feel more negatively. However, it had an overall positive response with 77% of participants. Despite the campaign only resonating positively with a third of parents who had refused or doubted vaccines, it demonstrates an important in-road into this hard-to-reach group.

Vaccination uptake by vaccine-hesitant parents attending a specialist immunization clinic in Australia

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) is an issue of global concern. The quality of communication between healthcare providers and parents can influence parental immunization acceptance. We aimed to describe immunization uptake following specialist immunization clinic (SIC) consultation for Australian children of VH parents as a cohort, and according to pre-clinic parental position on immunization. At a single tertiary pediatric SIC (RCH, Melbourne) a retrospective descriptive study classified VH families according to 3 proposed parental positions on immunization at initial clinic attendance. Immunization status at follow up was ascertained via the Australian Children's Immunization Register and National HPV Program Register and compared between groups. Of the VH cohort, 13/38 (34%) families were classified as hesitant, 21 (55%) as late/selective vaccinators and 4 (11%) as vaccine refusers. Mean follow up post-SIC attendance was 14.5 months. For the overall VH cohort, the majority chose selective immunization (42%) following SIC consultation. When analyzed by pre-clinic parental position on immunization, there was a trend for hesitant families to proceed with full immunization, selective families to continue selective immunization and refusing families to remain unimmunised (p < 0.0001). The most commonly omitted vaccines were hepatitis B (66%) and Haemophilus influenzae type B (55%), followed by the meningococcal C conjugate vaccine (53%) and measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (53%). Immunization outcome appears to correlate with pre-clinic parental position on immunization for the majority of families attending a SIC in Australia, with selective immunization the most common outcome. Tailored communication approaches based on parental position on immunization may optimise clinic resources and engagement of families, but require prospective research evaluation.