Dataset Information

Vaccine hesitancy and cognitive biases: Evidence for tailored communication with parents.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Vaccine hesitancy (VH) remains worldwide a reason of concern. Most of the vaccination education strategies followed a "fact-based" approach, based on the assumption that decision making is a rational process, without considering the influence of cognitive biases and heuristics. Our study aimed at identifying factors involved in the parents' vaccination choice to inform and shape communication interventions.

Methods

We conducted an online national survey among parents between November 2020 and April 2021. The questionnaire consisted of 42 items organised in 4 parts: (1) personal information, (2) cognitive biases and risk propension, (3) Analytic Thinking (Cognitive Reflection Test), (4) conspiracy mentality, health literacy, and VH. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to identify latent variables underlying the 19 items related to the 6 cognitive biases. Factors were categorised in quintiles and the corresponding pseudo-continuous variables used as predictors of the VH. Logistic regression model was applied to assess the association of the VH with factors, conspiracy mentality and risk propension. We adjusted for age, gender, economic status, and education levels.

Results

The study included 939 parents, 764 women (81.4%), 69.8% had a degree or higher level of education. Considering cognitive biases, four factors explaining 54% of the total variance were identified and characterised as: fear of the side effects of vaccines (scepticism factor); carelessness of the risk and consequences of infections (denial factor); optimistic attitude (optimistic bias factor); preference for natural products (naturalness bias factor). All factors were positively associated to VH (p < 0.001) as were conspiracy mentality (p = 0.007) and risk propension (p = 0.002).

Conclusions

This study confirmed the need to amplify the model used to analyse the VH considering cognitive biases as important factor affecting the parents' decision making. These results may be useful to design personalised communication interventions regarding vaccines and vaccination.

SUBMITTER: Casigliani V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9289735 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVaccine hesitancy has been a growing challenge for public health in recent decades. Among factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy, concerns regarding vaccine safety and Adverse Events (AEs) play the leading role. Moreover, cognitive biases are critical in connecting such concerns to vaccine hesitancy behaviors, but their role has not been comprehensively studied. In this study, our first objective is to address concerns regarding vaccine AEs to increase vaccine acceptance. Our second objective is to identify the potential cognitive biases connecting vaccine hesitancy concerns to vaccine-hesitant behaviors and identify the mechanism they get triggered in the vaccine decision-making process.MethodsFirst, to mitigate concerns regarding AEs, we quantitatively analyzed the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from 2011 to 2018 and provided evidence regarding the non-severity of the AEs that can be used as a communicable summary to increase vaccine acceptance. Second, we focused on the vaccination decision-making process. We reviewed cognitive biases and vaccine hesitancy literature to identify the most potential cognitive biases that affect vaccine hesitancy and categorized them adopting the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM).ResultsOur results show that the top frequent AEs are expected mild reactions like injection site erythema (4.29%), pyrexia (3.66%), and injection site swelling (3.21%). 94.5% of the reports are not serious and the average population-based serious reporting rate over the 8 years was 25.3 reports per 1 million population. We also identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect people's vaccination decision-making and nudge them toward vaccine hesitancy. We categorized these biases based on the factors that trigger them and discussed how they contribute to vaccine hesitancy.ConclusionsThis paper provided an evidence-based communicable summary of VAERS. As the most trusted sources of vaccine information, health practitioners can use this summary to provide evidence-based vaccine information to vaccine decision-makers (patients/parents) and mitigate concerns over vaccine safety and AEs. In addition, we identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect the vaccination decision-making process and nudge people toward vaccine hesitancy. Any plan, intervention, and message to increase vaccination uptake should be modified to decrease the effect of these potential cognitive biases.

Project description:BackgroundImmunisation is one of public health's greatest success stories, yet, annually, 20 million children miss out entirely or partially on routine immunisation. National immunisation estimates have the United Arab Emirates (UAE) lagging behind with 4% of children under the age of 1 not having received any vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy is considered one of the biggest barriers to vaccination. This study aims to evaluate the UAE's parents' vaccination attitudes and practices as well as estimate vaccine hesitancy's prevalence and determinants.MethodologyThis cross-sectional, descriptive study collected data from parents across the UAE during the months of March and April 2024. The 60-item questionnaire included the Parental Attitudes towards Childhood Vaccines scale (PACV), the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, and the Digital Vaccine Literacy (DVL) scale. Univariate, bivariate (chi-squared test), and multivariate (logistic regression) analyses were conducted.ResultsA total of 550 responses were retained. 84.55% of participants were female (n = 465/550), half were middle-aged (31-45 years old), and 21.09% (n = 116/550) were healthcare workers. 94.36% (n = 519/550) had their child/children receive all mandated vaccines. Only 39.82% (n = 219/550) found their level of knowledge about childhood vaccinations to be good/excellent. 70.11% (n = 386/550) of participants had high digital vaccine literacy. More than 95% had positive attitudes towards measles, meningitis, and pertussis vaccines. 14.00% (n = 77/550) were identified as vaccine-hesitant according to the PACV. Overall, using general practitioner/ paediatrician as a knowledge source, digital vaccine literacy, perceived children's vaccine knowledge, and nationality were associated with lower vaccine hesitancy status.ConclusionVaccine hesitancy exists and is prevalent in the UAE; however, the majority of participants reported high trust in vaccines, the local healthcare systems and physicians. Vaccine hesitancy can be tackled but will require tailored solutions and proactive healthcare workers.