Confidence in vaccination: a parent model
Introduction
Vaccination is often lauded as one of the ten greatest public health achievements in the last century [1]. In the U.S., vaccination rates have reached near all-time high levels [2], while the incidence of vaccine preventable disease has diminished to record lows [3]. Despite this remarkable legacy, controversies about vaccines and vaccination policy, while not new [4], still flourish. The genesis of concerns about vaccines has been broadly reviewed in the literature, and it appears that a confluence of events and perceptions are fueling the centuries old debate about the safety of vaccines [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17].
First, to an increasing number of healthcare providers and parents, vaccine preventable diseases are but a distant memory, of which they have little to no first hand experience. This lack of experience combined with the proliferation of negative vaccine messages in the media, the Internet and Congress, raises doubt among some members of the public about the necessity or benefits of vaccines. Alternative medical beliefs, many of which possess negative views of vaccines, have also become more popular. Finally, some individuals and groups have expressed distrust of governmental agencies or other experts that establish U.S. vaccination policy.
To help counter these concerns and improve risk communications about vaccines, many policy makers have suggested the need for additional research to better understand how parents make vaccine decisions for their children [13], [18]. We conducted a national mail survey of parents to ascertain prevailing attitudes, beliefs and behaviors about vaccination and to determine whether differences in attitudes and beliefs exist that could be used to improve vaccine communications.
Section snippets
Material and method
A mail study was completed in January 2001 by Ipsos Health, a market research supplier, among parents of children under the age of 16, drawn from the Home Testing Institute (HTI) consumer panel. This panel is maintained by Ipsos Health and used for proprietary market research across a number of different industries. The panel was constructed to match the U.S. Census on demographic and geographic variables including household size, household income, age of head of household, socioeconomic status
Results
Overall, 2018 parents (of 4115) returned the survey, yielding a return rate of 49%. Parents from the sub-sample, youngest child under seven years of age returned 1079 surveys (2105 were sent), a 51% response rate. The second sub-sample consisting of parents with youngest child between 10 and 15 years of age returned 451 surveys (842 were sent), a response rate of 54%. The third sub-sample of parents who were African Americans and English-speaking Hispanics returned 488 surveys (1168 were sent),
Discussion
Our findings demonstrate that overall parent confidence in vaccines remains high; the majority of parents believe vaccinations are very important and generally safe. Findings were similar to the research conducted by the National Network for Immunization Information (NNII) in mid 1999, although the methodologies differed. In the earlier research, 86.9% of parents deemed vaccinations as extremely important versus 89% in our study. Likewise, in the 1999 NNII study, parents assigned vaccines an
Conclusions
We have confirmed prior research [29], [30], [31] that parents continue to rely on their healthcare providers as the primary, most credible source about vaccination and provider recommendations carry substantial influence with parents. Our research quantified the divergent parental attitudes, beliefs and behaviors regarding vaccinations and uniquely identified and profiled four distinct parent groups. Because parents are not homogeneous in their vaccine attitudes and the factors that influence
Acknowledgment
This project was funded by the Merck Vaccine Division.
References (33)
- et al.
Understanding those who do not understand: a brief review of the anti-vaccine movement
Vaccine
(2001) Vaccine safety: injecting a dose of common sense
Mayo Clin Proc
(2000)- et al.
Patterns of vaccination acceptance
Soc Sci Med
(1999) - et al.
Cognitive processes and the decisions of some parents to forego pertussis vaccination for their children
J Clin Epidemiol
(1996) Vaccine safety: risk communication—a global perspective
Vaccine
(2001)- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Achievements in public health, 1900–1999 Impact of Vaccines Universally...
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National, State and Urban Area Vaccination Coverage Levels Among Children...
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Summary of notifiable diseases—United States, 2000. MMWR...
Bacilli and bullets: William Osler and the antivaccination movement
South Med J
(2000)- et al.
Vaccine safety: current and future challenges
Pediatr Ann
(1998)
The Rotavirus vaccine's withdrawal and physicians’ trust in vaccine safety mechanisms
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med
Cited by (92)
Interventions for vaccine hesitancy
2021, Current Opinion in ImmunologyCitation Excerpt :Thus, emphasizing that vaccine hesitancy cannot be expressed in a single form due the varying degrees of indecision or doubt towards vaccines [6,7]. In a survey aimed at American parents, when asked about their perceptions of vaccines, were found to either be convinced on the benefits of vaccines; concerned for their child’s well-being and thereby cautious of vaccines; as well as parents who distrusted vaccines and vaccine policies [8]. As seen in high income countries, reasons for parental vaccine hesitancy included misinformation about vaccines, reluctance of recommendation from health practitioners, lack of knowledge, and safety concerns [9].
MomsTalkShots: An individually tailored educational application for maternal and infant vaccines
2019, VaccineCitation Excerpt :Cross-sectional surveys in the US and Australia have used audience segmentation to profile parents based upon their vaccine attitudes, beliefs and intentions. Parents generally fall into five vaccine groups/profiles: (1) Immunization Advocates who actively seek vaccination, (2) Go Along to Get Along who follow the advice of their doctors and perceived social norms to vaccinate, (3) Cautious Acceptors who vaccinate but with caution, (4) Fence-Sitters who are very uncertain in their vaccine decisions, and (5) Refusers who actively reject some or all vaccines [23–29]. Segmenting parents allows for tailoring interventions though, to our knowledge, tailoring vaccine educational interventions based upon audience segmentation has not been widely used outside of conversations between providers and parents.