Introduction to the Special Section: Cross-Cultural Beliefs, Attitudes, and Dilemmas About Vaccination

Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale: a Bifactor-ESEM approach in a youth sample (15-24 years)

BACKGROUND

The Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) Scale is a widely used scale designed to measure general attitudes toward vaccinations. However, evidence for the VAX's structural, convergent, and discriminant validity is still limited, especially in youth samples.

METHODS

The present study examined the psychometric multidimensionality and evidence of convergent and discriminant validity of the VAX using the bifactor-exploratory structural equation modeling approach (bifactor-ESEM). Using a sample of 803 Serbian adolescents and young adults (Mage = 18.23, SDage = 2.66, age range = 15-24 years, 59.2% female), we contrasted the original four-factor model of the VAX with alternative solutions (ESEM, bifactor-CFA, and bifactor-ESEM), and investigated associations between vaccination attitudes and a variety of external criteria.

RESULTS

The results supported the bifactor-ESEM solution with one general factor of vaccination attitudes and four specific factors (Mistrust of vaccine benefit, Worries about unforeseen future effects, Concerns about commercial profiteering, and Preference for natural immunity) as the best representation of the data. The general factor was well-defined, and three specific factors showed good validity and specificity after the general factor was taken into account. The results of convergent validity analyses showed that the general factor of vaccine attitudes and one specific factor (Mistrust of vaccine benefit) were good predictors of vaccine conspiracy beliefs, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19, and trust in healthcare. The remaining three specific factors' contributions to external criteria were generally weak and nonsignificant. Evidence of the discriminant validity of the VAX scores was supported by weak positive associations of the general factor with medical fears and paranoid worry.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings indicate that distinguishing general and specific components of vaccination attitudes offers a more nuanced assessment and understanding of vaccination attitudes.

Parent and caregiver perceptions about the safety and effectiveness of foreign and domestic vaccines in Shanghai, China

Background

Chinese parents have access to domestic and foreign vaccines for their children. Their vaccine preferences are unclear, especially given recent pharmaceutical quality scandals and widely held beliefs deriving from Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). This study characterized parental beliefs about the safety and effectiveness of Chinese and foreign vaccines.

Methods

In May 2014, caregivers of young children at public immunization clinics in Shanghai, China, responded to a survey on vaccine perceptions. The two outcomes (differential belief in the effectiveness and safety of foreign vs domestic vaccines) were separately regressed onto demographic predictors in multinomial logistic regression models.

Results

Among 618 caregivers, 56% thought the effectiveness of domestic and foreign vaccines were comparable; 33% thought domestic were more effective and 11% foreign. Two-thirds thought foreign and domestic vaccines had similar safety; 11% thought domestic were safer and 21% thought foreign were safer. Compared to college graduates, those with a high school education or less had greater odds of believing domestic vaccines were more effective, and also had greater odds of believing imported vaccines were safer. Greater trust in TCM was not associated with differential beliefs in the effectiveness or safety of domestic vs foreign vaccines.

Conclusions

Although there is no evidence that foreign and domestic vaccines differ in either effectiveness or safety, less educated caregivers in China (but not those with greater trust in TCM) appear to believe such differences exist. Further exploration of the causes of these beliefs may be necessary in order to optimize vaccine communications in China.

Health literacy and infectious diseases: why does it matter?

OBJECTIVES

Multifactorial interventions are crucial to arrest the threat posed by infectious diseases. Public involvement requires adequate information, but determinants such as health literacy can impact on the effective use of such knowledge. The influence of health literacy on infectious diseases is examined in this paper.

METHODS

Databases were searched from January 1999 through July 2015 seeking studies reporting on health literacy and infections such tuberculosis, malaria, and influenza, and infection-related behaviours such as vaccination and hand hygiene. HIV was excluded, as comprehensive reviews have already been published.

RESULTS

Studies were found on antibiotic knowledge and use, the adoption of influenza and MMR immunizations, and screening for sexually transmitted and viral hepatitis infections. There was a lack of investigations on areas such as tuberculosis, malaria, hand hygiene, and diarrhoeal diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited or insufficient health literacy was associated with reduced adoption of protective behaviours such as immunization, and an inadequate understanding of antibiotics, although the relationship was not consistent. Large gaps remain in relation to infectious diseases with a high clinical and societal impact, such as tuberculosis and malaria.