A deliberate choice? Exploring factors related to informed decision-making about childhood vaccination among acceptors, refusers, and partial acceptors

Parents' or legal guardians' beliefs and attitudes about childhood vaccination: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

to map scientific evidence about perceptions, beliefs, knowledge and attitudes of parents or legal guardians of children under 5 years of age regarding routine childhood vaccination.

METHODS

a scoping review, conducted in accordance with the JBI framework. The searches were carried out in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus and LILACS databases. A total of 5,535 studies were returned and 77 were selected, which met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

perceptions related to interaction with healthcare professionals and services, with family organization and structure, with social interaction and public policies, cultural, religious and personal beliefs, knowledge about vaccination schedule, vaccination and immunization process and sources of information are the main factors mapped and which can positively or negatively influence parents' or legal guardians' attitudes towards vaccinating children.

CONCLUSIONS

the findings allow us to identify factors related to parents' perception and beliefs about childhood vaccination.

The Delicate Situation of Childhood Vaccination: On the Dispreferredness of Soliciting Parents' Intent to Vaccinate

In the Netherlands, parents of newborns typically participate in two-, four-, and eight-week medical consultations to monitor their children's development and discuss vaccinations, which will not be administered before eight weeks. During these visits, healthcare professionals routinely ask parents if they intend to vaccinate their children (i.e. to participate in the National Immunization Program). Using Conversation Analysis, we examine 62 videotaped consultations and present two lines of evidence to argue that the sequence initiated by professionals wherein they solicit parents' intent to vaccinate is dispreferred. First, this action is routinely deferred by preliminary sequences. Second, when professionals eventually initiate this action (i.e. if it is not preempted by parents during pre-sequences), they orient to its dispreferred status, for example by highlighting benefactive details of vaccination. We discuss the possible existence of asymmetrical (initiator-sided) pre-sequences, why soliciting parents' vaccination intent might be dispreferred, and implications for the design of communication interventions.

From awareness to action: Unveiling knowledge, attitudes and testing strategies to enhance human papillomavirus vaccination uptake in Jordan

Purpose

Vaccination against HPV plays a crucial role in preventing cervical cancer and related health issues. This study aimed to (1) assess knowledge, awareness, intentions, and attitudes regarding HPV and vaccination among Jordanian parents, and (2) evaluate the efficacy of two intervention strategies in promoting knowledge, awareness, and attitudes towards HPV vaccinations.

Methods

In study one, a web-based survey was used to collect data from Jordanian parents. In study two, participants were allocated into three groups: video-based intervention, lecture-based intervention, and a control group. Pre-post tests were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention strategies in promoting knowledge, awareness, and attitudes toward HPV vaccination among Jordanian parents.

Results

A total of 572 participants took part in the survey. Knowledge levels about HPV and its vaccine were generally low. Intentions regarding HPV vaccination were uncertain for the majority of participants, with 92 % reported as not receiving any guidance from medical professionals about administering the HPV vaccine to themselves or their children. Only 22 % agreed that their children might get infected with HPV at any time in their lives. The pilot randomized clinical trial revealed an improvement in knowledge, awareness, and attitudes towards HPV vaccination in both intervention groups compared to the control group with large effect sizes (eta squared between 0.29 and 0.68).

Conclusions

Findings highlight the need for increased knowledge and awareness regarding HPV and vaccination. It also supported the potential effectiveness of basic educational efforts in significantly improving knowledge, awareness, and attitudes towards the HPV vaccine.

Parental views and the key role of nurses for high vaccine acceptance in Sweden - a focus group study

BACKGROUND

In Sweden, vaccine uptake is exceptionally high due to an efficient child immunization program. More than 97% of Swedish children were vaccinated at child health care centers (CHCs) according to the schedule at 2 years of age in 2021. From the age of 6 years, vaccinations are given within the school health care. Maintaining high vaccination coverage over time is one of the central motives to explore and understand drivers for vaccine acceptance. The current study aimed to assess parental vaccine acceptance concerning the national immunization program and explore factors contributing to the high vaccine acceptance in Sweden.

METHODS

Parents of children aged 1-2 years and 8-12 years were recruited through purposive sampling and asked to participate in focus groups held in three cities in Sweden, in February and March 2019. In total, 47 parents participated in two focus groups per city, one session for parents of younger (1-2 years) and older (8-12 years) children respectively. The focus group discussions were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Parents of children aged 1-2 years expressed the themes; strong compliance to and protection of the value of vaccinations; parents feel safe with an attentive relationship with their nurse; the spectrum of communication needs is essential to meet. For parents to children aged 8-12 years, the themes expressed were; vaccinate to do good for the individual and society; a foundation of trust is built at CHCs for decisions later on; decisions for vaccination become more complex as children get older; communication changes as children get older and need to be explicit and tailored to the situation.

CONCLUSION

Both individual and societal perspectives were shown to influence the vaccination decision for childhood immunizations, as manifested in parental reflections and experiences. As nurses have a key role, it is important to provide them with continued support and tools to facilitate their support for parents in making informed decisions. Continuous work for supporting driving factors for vaccination over time is needed to maintain high vaccine acceptance in Sweden.

Psychological mechanisms and interventions directed at vaccination attitudes

Attitudes about vaccination impact not only the individual but also society. Therefore, understanding the underlying psychological processes of those who disagree with vaccination is critical for creating compassion through understanding and change through promoting autonomy. The current review aimed to fill a gap in the literature, outlining the state of the recent research on vaccination attitudes, specifically on the underlying mechanisms driving anti-vaccination movements and individuals' thoughts and behaviors. In addition, we aimed to evaluate current research on the effectiveness of interventions targeting these mechanisms. Overall, results indicated that those declining vaccines had beliefs related to distrust in the scientific community and pharmaceutical companies and moral preferences for purity and liberty. In addition, our review identified the potential for utilizing motivational interviewing techniques as an intervention. This literature review provides a platform for further research and enhances the current understanding of vaccination attitudes.

The effect of emotion regulation strategies on decision-making about the maternal pertussis vaccination among pregnant women in the Netherlands: an experimental study

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether cognitive reappraisal and acceptance are effective emotion regulation strategies to decrease the influence of negative affect on intention to accept maternal pertussis vaccination (MPV) among pregnant women in the Netherlands.

METHODS

An experimental study with baseline and two follow-up measurements was conducted. Participants selected after baseline (N = 382) were randomized into two experimental groups (cognitive reappraisal, acceptance) and a control group. The effect of the experimental manipulations on negative affect was examined with multilevel analyses. A moderation analysis was performed to examine whether the manipulations moderated the association between negative affect and intention.

RESULTS

All groups showed a decrease in negative affect (all p's < 0.001), with no differences between groups. A small decrease in the influence of negative affect on intention was found among those who used acceptance.

CONCLUSION

No additional value of the emotion regulation strategies was found compared to the control group. However, exploratory analyses showed that acceptance seemed a promising strategy to decrease the influence of negative affect on intention to accept MPV.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This study stressed the relevance for communication strategies to consider the emotions pregnant women experience during the decision-making process about the MPV.

Decision making in vaccine hesitant parents and pregnant women - An integrative review

Objectives

: Vaccine refusal is increasing in Australia and is a major concern in high- and middle-income countries. There is evidence to suggest that some parents, even those who elect to immunise, may be vaccine hesitant with some manipulating the schedule by excluding or delaying some vaccines. The aim of this review was to gain an understanding of factors that influence vaccine decision-making in pregnant women and parents of children.

Design

: An integrative review approach was used to produce an analysis of existing literature on vaccine decision-making in pregnancy and parents. As the broadest of review methods, an integrative review can include a range of experimental and non-experimental research, thereby ensuring the inclusion of data from multiple perspectives.

Data Sources

: Online databases were searched for research related to vaccine decision-making in pregnant women and parents. Original and review articles were sought that were published in English between 2015 and 2021. Reviewed articles included qualitative and quantitative studies and systematic reviews. No mixed methods papers were located or excluded from this review.

Review methods

: The review method was an integrative review informed by Coughlan.

Results

: Papers from thirteen predominantly high- and middle-income countries were selected for this review. A total of 31 articles fit the inclusion/exclusion criteria, including qualitative, quantitative and review articles. Three main themes were identified including the role of healthcare professionals, vaccine safety concerns and alternative influences. Alternative influences included: social media, friends and family, religion, conspiracy theories and salutogenic parenting. Findings suggest that high levels of anxiety are involved in vaccine decision-making with parents seeking information from multiple sources including healthcare professionals, friends and family and social media.

Conclusions

: Pregnancy is an ideal time to provide education on both pregnancy and childhood vaccinations. However, some parents reported dissatisfaction in their therapeutic relationships with healthcare professionals. As a result, parents can resort to their own information seeking, in the main via social media which has been linked to vaccine refusal. Additionally, some healthcare professionals report feeling inadequately prepared for the role of immunisation promotion and provision. Parental information seeking from non-traditional sources has been shown to result in the acquisition of misinformation, exposure to conspiracy theories, the inevitable loss of vaccine confidence and subsequent vaccine refusal.

What College Biology Students Know about How Vaccines Work

Vaccines are an important and societally relevant biology topic, but it is unclear how much college biology students know about how vaccines work and what inaccurate ideas they have about that process. Therefore, we asked more than 600 college students taking biology courses at various levels to explain, "How does a vaccine work?" in a free-response format. Based on authoritative sources and responses from immunology and other biology faculty, we created a rubric to gauge the basic knowledge and accuracy present in student responses. Basic knowledge was defined as knowing that vaccines mimic the pathogen, elicit an active immune response, and provide protection against future infection. Accuracy was defined as the absence of scientifically inaccurate ideas. We found that advanced biology majors score significantly higher in basic knowledge and accuracy when compared with all other student groups, but there were no differences between entering biology majors, pre-health majors, and non-pre-health majors. We also uncovered a variety of inaccurate ideas, with the most common being that vaccines contain the original, unmodified pathogen. These results provide a new way to gauge college student understanding of how a vaccine works and enrich our understanding of what college students know about this process.

Decision-making on COVID-19 vaccination: A qualitative study among health care and social workers caring for vulnerable individuals

In January 2021, the Swiss government introduced the first COVID-19 vaccines and prioritized allocation to at-risk individuals and professionals working with them. Despite this opportunity, vaccine uptake among staff employed in retirement homes and institutes for people with disabilities was suboptimal. This study aimed to capture real-time decision-making about COVID-19 vaccine among staff employed in nursing homes and institutes for people with disabilities in Southern Switzerland. We conducted semi-structured phone-interviews with 25 staff employed in retirement homes and institutes for people with disabilities between February and May 2021, i.e., when participants had to decide whether they wanted to adhere to the priority vaccination programme. Among participants, 21 either signed up for the COVID-19 vaccination or were fully or partly vaccinated at the time of the interview. For most participants, the vaccination choice was a challenging process: information appeared to be lacking and conflicting; numerous moral principles were at stake and contradictory; the way vaccination was organized clashed with the health values to which respondents had been previously exposed; finally, the fear of discrimination for those who decided not to get vaccinated loomed over the vaccination choice. Participants decided for or against vaccination based on principles, traditions, emotions, and a reflexive assessment of the personal vs. collective benefit of the vaccination, the latter being the most common within the investigated sample. This study shows that deciding to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is a nuanced process and that individuals cannot simply be categorized as "novax" or "provax" based on their vaccination decision.

Balancing Between Being Proactive and Neutral: School Nurses' Experiences of Offering Human Papilloma Virus Vaccination to Girls

The aim of this study was to describe the experiences of Swedish school nurses when they offered the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination to girls aged 10-12 years. Four focus groups with a total of 17 school nurses were conducted and analyzed using inductive content analysis. The results showed that the school nurses were balancing between keeping a neutral role and the need to increase the uptake of the HPV vaccination. They described the consent forms and information that they gave the girls and their parents to help them make an informed decision about the vaccination. There were also ethical and moral dilemmas that arose with regard to the HPV vaccinations. Our findings demonstrate the need to provide school nurses with clear guidelines and support, so they can play an active role in interacting with the girls and their parents when they offer the HPV vaccination.

Psychosocial and organizational barriers and facilitators of meningococcal vaccination (MenACWY) acceptance among adolescents and parents during the Covid-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to identify differences and similarities among adolescents and parents in various psychosocial factors influencing meningococcal ACWY (MenACWY) vaccination acceptance. Besides, the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic was assessed as well as resulting organizational adjustments.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey among adolescents that attended the appointment for the MenACWY vaccination in South Limburg between May and June 2020, and their parents. Independent t-tests and χ² test were performed to explore differences in psychosocial and organisational factors between adolescents and parents.

RESULTS

In total, 592 adolescents (20%) and 1197 parents (38%) filled out the questionnaire. Adolescents scored lower on anticipated negative affect towards MenACWY vaccination refusal [t (985.688) = - 9.32; ρ < 0.001], moral norm towards MenACWY vaccination acceptance [t (942.079) = - 10.38; ρ < 0.001] and knowledge about the MenACWY vaccination and meningococcal disease [t (1059.710) = - 11.24; ρ < 0.001]. Both adolescents and parents reported a social norm favouring accepting childhood vaccinations, but adolescent scored higher [t (1122.846) = 23.10; ρ < 0.001]. The Covid-19 pandemic did barely influence the decision to accept the MenACWY vaccination. Only 6% of the participants indicated that Covid-19 influenced their decision. In addition, the individual vaccination appointment was rated very positive. Most adolescents (71.5%) and parents (80.6%) prefer future vaccinations to be offered individually rather than having mass vaccinations sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an indication of which psychosocial and organisational factors should be addressed in future MenACWY vaccination campaigns. Individual vaccination appointments for adolescents should be considered, taking the costs and logistical barriers into account.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: The Role of Information Sources and Beliefs in Dutch Adults

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy may be regarded as a new pandemic hindering the elimination of or coping with COVID-19. This study assessed reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy using the I-Change Model (ICM) by considering the role of informational and psychosocial factors. A cross-sectional online survey using a convenience sample was conducted among Dutch adults (n = 240). The questionnaire assessed information factors, predisposing factors, awareness factors, motivational factors, preparatory actions, and vaccination intention. Vaccine hesitant participants (n = 58, 24%) had lower levels of education, more often paid work, and tended to have a religion other than Catholicism. They used written media less often and tended to visit websites of public health organizations less often, but used messaging services like WhatsApp more frequently. All participants had neutral intentions towards checking information credibility. Vaccine hesitant respondents had less knowledge about vaccination, lower perceived severity of getting sick and dying of COVID-19, and reported fewer exposures to cues about the advantages of COVID-19 vaccination. They were less convinced of the emotional and rational advantages of COVID-19 vaccination and expressed more negative feelings about it. They also reported more negative social norms concerning COVID-19 vaccination, and lower self-efficacy to get vaccinated and to cope with potential side-effects. The regression model explained 58% of the variance in vaccination intention. The results suggest that strategies are needed to: 1. Reduce fake news and stimulate information checking to foster well-informed decision-making; 2. Target both rational and emotional consequences of COVID-19, in addition to strategies for optimizing levels of knowledge. Campaigns should acknowledge the perceptions of the emotional disadvantages and increase perceptions of emotional advantages of COVID-19 vaccinations, such as reducing feelings of regret, and increasing feelings of freedom and reassurance.

Facilitating Middle School Students' Reasoning About Vaccines

In a pandemic era, it is necessary to equip individuals with the ability to make informed decisions about health issues, especially in relation to viruses and vaccines. In order to achieve this goal, science educators need to explore students' decisions and reasoning about vaccination. The aim of the study reported in the paper, therefore, is to explore eighth graders' reasoning about vaccination throughout a 4-week implementation of small group and plenary discussion of false claims about vaccinations. The implementation consisted of a five-phase procedure including teacher presentation of false claims and related evidence texts about vaccination, small group discussions, a plenary discussion, and finally, an introduction to valid scientific content about vaccination. The explanations of the representatives from each group during the plenary discussion were video-taped and analyzed by the researchers independently to examine student decisions on each claim. Another data source of this study included student interviews in which the researchers videotaped and analyzed eight interviewees' responses. The findings revealed that including well-informed students in small group and plenary discussions may have a positive impact on other students' reasoning. This result indicated the benefit of encouraging students to provide evidence about vaccines during small group and plenary discussions in terms of their reasoning. The implications of this study suggest the necessity of emphasizing on scientific knowledge as well as argumentation for further investigations of students' reasoning on vaccination.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11191-021-00318-8.

Responding to Questions from Parents with Vaccine Concerns

INTRODUCTION

Even with the benefits of vaccinations, some parents refuse vaccinations because of the influence of vaccine opponents. The purpose of this article is to identify common vaccine concerns on public forums and address these concerns with scientific evidence, thereby offering pediatric nurse practitioners (PNPs) information on how to respond.

METHOD

Six electronic databases were searched to identify parental concerns regarding vaccines and provide evidence-based responses to each concern.

RESULTS

Some parents are concerned that health care providers do not obtain written informed consent before vaccinating their children. Another common concern is that pharmaceutical companies are solely motivated by financial profits when manufacturing vaccines. Parents also share concerns about vaccine manufacturers' exemption from liability for those who suffer a vaccine-related injury.

DISCUSSION

PNPs are responsible for addressing parents' concerns regarding vaccines and providing the public with correct information. PNPs are in a prime position to influence parental vaccine decision-making positively.

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is one of the most effective ways to prevent serious illnesses and deaths in children. However, worldwide, many children do not receive all recommended vaccinations, for several potential reasons. Vaccines might be unavailable, or parents may experience difficulties in accessing vaccination services; for instance, because of poor quality health services, distance from a health facility, or lack of money. Some parents may not accept available vaccines and vaccination services. Our understanding of what influences parents' views and practices around childhood vaccination, and why some parents may not accept vaccines for their children, is still limited. This synthesis links to Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to improve coverage or uptake of childhood vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

- Explore parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination, and the factors influencing acceptance, hesitancy, or nonacceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors reduce parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three other databases for eligible studies from 1974 to June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that: utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on parents' or caregivers' views, practices, acceptance, hesitancy, or refusal of routine vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where childhood vaccination is provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a pre-specified sampling frame to sample from eligible studies, aiming to capture studies that were conceptually rich, relevant to the review's phenomenon of interest, from diverse geographical settings, and from a range of income-level settings. We extracted contextual and methodological data from each sampled study. We used a meta-ethnographic approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of criteria used in previous Cochrane Reviews and originally based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We integrated the findings of this review with those from relevant Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. We did this by mapping whether the underlying theories or components of trial interventions included in those reviews related to or targeted the overarching factors influencing parental views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination identified by this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 145 studies in the review and sampled 27 of these for our analysis. Six studies were conducted in Africa, seven in the Americas, four in South-East Asia, nine in Europe, and one in the Western Pacific. Studies included urban and rural settings, and high-, middle-, and low-income settings. Many complex factors were found to influence parents' vaccination views and practices, which we divided into four themes. Firstly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their broader ideas and practices surrounding health and illness generally, and specifically with regards to their children, and their perceptions of the role of vaccination within this context. Secondly, many parents' vaccination ideas and practices were influenced by the vaccination ideas and practices of the people they mix with socially. At the same time, shared vaccination ideas and practices helped some parents establish social relationships, which in turn strengthened their views and practices around vaccination. Thirdly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by wider political issues and concerns, and particularly their trust (or distrust) in those associated with vaccination programmes. Finally, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their access to and experiences of vaccination services and their frontline healthcare workers. We developed two concepts for understanding possible pathways to reduced acceptance of childhood vaccination. The first concept, 'neoliberal logic', suggests that many parents, particularly from high-income countries, understood health and healthcare decisions as matters of individual risk, choice, and responsibility. Some parents experienced this understanding as in conflict with vaccination programmes, which emphasise generalised risk and population health. This perceived conflict led some parents to be less accepting of vaccination for their children. The second concept, 'social exclusion', suggests that some parents, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, were less accepting of childhood vaccination due to their experiences of social exclusion. Social exclusion may damage trustful relationships between government and the public, generate feelings of isolation and resentment, and give rise to demotivation in the face of public services that are poor quality and difficult to access. These factors in turn led some parents who were socially excluded to distrust vaccination, to refuse vaccination as a form of resistance or a way to bring about change, or to avoid vaccination due to the time, costs, and distress it creates. Many of the overarching factors our review identified as influencing parents' vaccination views and practices were underrepresented in the interventions tested in the four related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review has revealed that parents' views and practices regarding childhood vaccination are complex and dynamic social processes that reflect multiple webs of influence, meaning, and logic. We have provided a theorised understanding of the social processes contributing to vaccination acceptance (or not), thereby complementing but also extending more individualistic models of vaccination acceptance. Successful development of interventions to promote acceptance and uptake of childhood vaccination will require an understanding of, and then tailoring to, the specific factors influencing vaccination views and practices of the group(s) in the target setting. The themes and concepts developed through our review could serve as a basis for gaining this understanding, and subsequent development of interventions that are potentially more aligned with the norms, expectations, and concerns of target users.

Exploring mechanisms of a web-based values-tailored childhood vaccine promotion intervention trial: Effects on parental vaccination values, attitudes, and intentions

A recent childhood vaccine promotion intervention trial showed no effects on vaccination outcomes relative to usual care. The purpose of this paper was to test assumptions and theory-based relationships underlying hypothesised mechanisms for two vaccine promotion educational websites (one tailored to parental values, beliefs, and intentions; one untailored) compared with usual care. This is a secondary analysis of a three-arm randomized controlled trial. Parental vaccine values, hesitancy, attitudes, and intention to vaccinate surveys were administered at baseline (≤2 months) and at 4-6 and 10-12 months of age. Vaccination was assessed using electronic health records. Analyses included random coefficient models and risk differences with exact confidence limits. Parental vaccine values were mostly stable over time. Vaccine attitudes were generally positive, with no differences among study arms. Both tailored and untailored website arms showed similar increases in intention to vaccinate more than usual care. Positive changes in intentions were associated with lower rates of late vaccination. Although attitudes and intentions predicted vaccination behavior and the intervention increased intention to vaccinate all on time, the web-based education and values-tailored messaging approaches were not effective at increasing vaccination rates. Intentions are necessary but insufficient targets for vaccine promotion interventions.

Household decision-making for the MenACWY vaccination: How parents and adolescents deal with an adolescent vaccination decision

OBJECTIVE

Between 2015 and 2018 The Netherlands experienced increases of invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) serogroup W (MenW), from 0.02 cases/100,000 people between 2010 and 2014 up to 0.5 cases/100,000 in 2017. Therefore in 2018 the MenACWY vaccination was introduced in the National Immunisation Programme (NIP) and a catch-up campaign was initiated among adolescents. This study aimed to gain insight into the decision-making process within households regarding the MenACWY vaccination. The focus was on the differences in the decision-making process of parents and adolescents and of those that had accepted the MenACWY vaccination and those that had not, in order to assess how these types of decisions are made within households.

METHOD

We conducted a total of 38 semi-structured interviews in 20 households (7 not vaccinated) with 20 parents and 18 adolescents (18 dyads) across The Netherlands concerning their decision-making process. Interview guides were constructed based on the Precaution Adaption Process (PAP) model. We performed thematic analysis using qualitative data analysis software (MAXQDA).

RESULTS

Parents are the main actors in the household decision-making process regarding the MenACWY vaccination. Parents start their decision-making process before adolescents are even aware of the issue. Households in the study took different approaches in involving the adolescent in the decision-making, resulting in three styles of household decision-making: parents decide without the adolescent, parents involve the adolescent, or parents leave it up to the adolescent to decide.

CONCLUSION

Parents influence adolescent reasoning, engagement and involvement during the MenACWY vaccination decision-making. And this is the case both among those that have accepted and rejected the MenACWY vaccination. Adolescent engagement with the MenACWY vaccination decision-making is either short-lived or non-existent. However, the moment offers opportunities to engage adolescents on vaccinations and decision-making, with parents as key figures to promote this.

How practice nurses engage with parents during their consultations about the MMR vaccine: a qualitative study

Aim:

We aimed to understand practice nurses’ perceptions about how they engage with parents during consultations concerning the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine.

Background:

The incidence of measles is increasing globally. Immunisation is recognised as the most significant intervention to influence global health in modern times, although many factors are known to adversely affect immunisation uptake. Practice nurses are a key member of the primary care team responsible for delivering immunisation. However, little is known how practice nurses perceive this role.

Methods:

Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 15 practice nurses in England using a qualitative descriptive approach. Diversity in terms of years of experience and range of geographical practice settings were sought. These interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and open-coded using qualitative content analysis to manage, analyse and identify themes.

Findings:

Three themes were derived from the data: engaging with parents, the informed practice nurse and dealing with parental concerns: strategies to promote MMR uptake. During their consultations, practice nurses encountered parents who held strong opinions about the MMR vaccine and perceived this to be related to the parents’ socio-demographic background. Practice nurses sought to provide parents with tailored and accurate sources of information to apprise their immunisation decision-making about the MMR vaccine.

Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded

In the light of the COVID-19 pandemic, anti-vaccine sentiments have been on the rise, with a recent seminal study on the development of anti-vaccine views in social media even making its way into Nature Communications. Yet, with the current scientific consensus being in overwhelming agreement over the safety and efficacy of vaccines, many scientists lose their grasp on the fears, concerns, and arguments that the opposition may hold. This paper discusses and evaluates vaccine-hesitant individuals on a socioeconomic, historical, and philosophical landscape. It also provides an analysis of common argumentative patterns and the psychological impact that these arguments may have on undecided individuals. The discussion also explores why anti-vaccine sentiments are on the rise, and how members of the scientific and medical community require a more structured approach to communicating key arguments. This is particularly important if vaccination rates and herd immunity are to be sustained. No longer is it sufficient to win arguments based on a factual and scientific basis, but rather scientists and medical practitioners have to focus on conveying confidence and reassurance on both an informative and emotional level to those with doubts and fears.

High overall confidence in childhood vaccination in Norway, slightly lower among the unemployed and those with a lower level of education

In Norway, childhood immunisation is offered on voluntary basis, free of charge and is delivered through trained nurses at > 650 child health centres and school health services. Maintaining high confidence in the vaccination programme is key to sustaining high vaccine uptake. We aimed to investigate confidence in childhood vaccination in the general population and to identify determinants for lower confidence. In 2017 and 2018, Statistics Norway asked questions on confidence in childhood vaccination (to all respondents) and children's vaccination history (to parents) in their routine cross-sectional survey. Respondents reported their level of agreement on a five-point Likert scale. Using a weighted analysis we calculated proportions agreeing [95% confidence interval] by respondent characteristics. Overall, 2169 individuals participated (54% response). 95.8% [94.8-96.7] answered that vaccination is important, 93.4% [92.2-94.4] thought that vaccines are safe, 96.0% [95.0-96.8] thought that vaccines are effective and for 93.4% [92.2-94.4] vaccination was compatible with their basic values. Those with lower level of education expressed lower confidence in vaccination due to conflict with their basic values (88.2% [84.7-91.0] answered positively). Those unemployed expressed lower confidence due to conflict with their basic values (81.9% [71.8-88.9]) and because of concerns about vaccines' safety (83.5% [73.7-90.1]). 96.3% [94.3-97.6] of parents (n = 580) had their children fully vaccinated, despite that one fifth answered that they at least once have had doubts on whether or not to vaccinate their children. There is high confidence in childhood vaccination in Norway. Those with a lower level of education and the unemployed reported comparatively lower confidence. To maintain high confidence in childhood vaccination, we recommend maintaining the well-informed system with easily accessible vaccinations. Furthermore, we recommend maintaining surveillance of vaccine confidence, supplemented with targeted studies on subgroups who are less confident, express doubts and/or oppose vaccination. Those studies should inform communication strategies tailored to subgroups.

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.

Assessing the Validity and Accuracy of Online Videos on Vaccine Health Risks

Incongruent vaccination rates have been found in multiple US cities, one cause possibly being misleading information that is easily available on the internet through text and videos. Health care providers should be aware of the extent and content of online health information available to patients and their guardians to enhance the effectiveness of patient-physician communication. This study obtained data on vaccine-related YouTube videos and analyzed the videos' content. When misleading information was found in a video, the timing and specific type of misleading information was noted. More than two thirds of the YouTube videos contained some type of unreliable information regarding vaccine safety and effectiveness. Much of the information accessible to patients and parents vaccinating their children is misleading to a potentially dangerous extent. Health care providers should be aware of and able to provide clear counter-evidence to misleading information on YouTube in light of the findings.