Dataset Information

Maternal perceptions of childhood vaccination: explanations of reasons for and against vaccination.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Understanding reasons for and against vaccination from the parental perspective is critical for designing vaccination campaigns and informing other interventions to increase vaccination uptake in Canada. The objective of this study was to understand maternal vaccination decision making for children. METHODS:Mothers participating in a longitudinal community-based pregnancy cohort, the All Our Babies study in Calgary, Alberta, completed open-ended survey questions providing explanations for the vaccination status of their child by 24?months postpartum. Qualitative responses were linked to administrative vaccination records to examine survey responses and recorded child vaccination status. RESULTS:There were 1560 open-ended responses available; 89% (n?=?1391) provided explanations for vaccinating their children, 5% (n?=?79) provided explanations for not vaccinating/delaying, and 6% (n?=?90) provided explanations for both. Themes were similar for those vaccinating and not vaccinating/delaying; however, interpretations were different. Two broad themes were identified: Sources of influence and Deliberative Processes. Sources of influence on decision making included personal, family, and external experiences. Deliberative Processes included risk, research, effectiveness, and balancing risks/benefits. Under Deliberative Processes, responsibility was a category for those vaccinating; while choice, instrumental/practical, and health issues were categories for those not vaccinating/delaying. Mothers' levels of conviction and motivation provided a Context for understanding their decision making perspectives. CONCLUSIONS:Vaccination decision making is complex and impacted by many factors that are similar but contribute to different decisions depending on mothers' perspectives. The results of this study indicate the need to examine new intervention approaches to increase uptake that recognize and address feelings of pressure and parental commitment to choice.

SUBMITTER: McNeil DA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6327385 | biostudies-other | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Maternal perceptions of childhood vaccination: explanations of reasons for and against vaccination.

McNeil Deborah A DA Mueller Melissa M MacDonald Shannon S McDonald Sheila S Saini Vineet V Kellner James D JD Tough Suzanne S

BMC public health 20190110 1

<h4>Background</h4>Understanding reasons for and against vaccination from the parental perspective is critical for designing vaccination campaigns and informing other interventions to increase vaccination uptake in Canada. The objective of this study was to understand maternal vaccination decision making for children.<h4>Methods</h4>Mothers participating in a longitudinal community-based pregnancy cohort, the All Our Babies study in Calgary, Alberta, completed open-ended survey questions providi ...[more]

PMID: 30630511

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite CDC recommendations regarding universal catch-up vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV), only about ten percent of young adult women in the United States have been vaccinated. The purpose of this study was to better understand reasons for non-vaccination among insured 19-26 year-old women and to evaluate future vaccination intentions.MethodsWe used an administrative claims database from a large US managed care plan to identify women aged 19-26 for receipt of a mailed survey. From a sample of 1,375 women with no evidence of HPV vaccination from June 1, 2006 through April 30, 2007, 222 completed surveys were received, of which 185 were eligible for this analysis. The main outcome measures were unvaccinated women's attitudes and vaccine awareness, likelihood of future action regarding the vaccine, and reasons for inaction.ResultsAmong the 185 non-vaccinees, 25.4% were married, 83.2% were white, and 89.2% had a college or higher level education. The vaccine was described as very important by 32.4% of subjects, and 30.1% had discussed the vaccine with a doctor and received a doctor's recommendation. Half or fewer of respondents were "very" or "extremely" likely to discuss the vaccine with their doctor (50.0%), do additional research on the vaccine (42.6%), ask a doctor to get the vaccine (37.5%), or make an appointment to get the vaccine (27.8%), while 48.0% were "somewhat", "very", or "extremely" likely to do nothing to get the vaccine. Among the latter, reasons for taking no action included being married or in a monogamous relationship (54.9%), belief that the vaccine is too new (35.4%), not having enough information about the vaccine (31.7%), concerns about side effects (24.4%), and uncertainty about insurance coverage (24.4%).ConclusionsEducational interventions may be needed to enhance HPV vaccination rates among 19-26 year-old women, particularly regarding information about vaccine safety, vaccine efficacy, insurance coverage, and the value of vaccination to women in monogamous relationships.

Project description:BackgroundBy mid 2023, European countries reached 75% of vaccine coverage for COVID-19 and although vaccination rates are quite high, many people are still hesitant. A plethora of studies have investigated factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, however, insufficient attention has been paid to the reasons why people get vaccinated against COVID-19. Our work aims to investigate the role of reasons in the decision to get vaccinated against COVID-19 in a representative sample of 1,689 adult Italians (March-April 2021) balanced in terms of age, gender, educational level and area of residence.MethodsThrough an online questionnaire, we asked participants to freely report up to three reasons for and against COVID-19 vaccination, and the weight each had in the decision to get vaccinated. We first investigated the role of emotional competence and COVID-19 risk perception in the generation of both reasons using regression models. Next, we studied the role that the different reasons had in the vaccination decision, considering both the intention to vaccinate (using a beta regression model) and the decision made by the participants who already had the opportunity to get vaccinated (using a logistic regression model). Finally, two different classification tree analyses were carried out to characterize profiles with a low or high willingness to get vaccinated or with a low or high probability to accept/book the vaccine.ResultsHigh emotional competence positively influences the generation of both reasons (ORs > 1.5), whereas high risk perception increases the generation of positive reasons (ORs > 1.4) while decreasing reasons against vaccination (OR = 0.64). As pro-reasons increase, vaccination acceptance increases, while the opposite happens as against-reasons increase (all p < 0.001). One strong reason in favor of vaccines is enough to unbalance the decision toward acceptance of vaccination, even when reasons against it are also present (p < 0.001). Protection and absence of distrust are the reasons that mostly drive willingness to be vaccinated and acceptance of an offered vaccine.ConclusionsKnowing the reasons that drive people's decision about such an important choice can suggest new communication insights to reduce possible negative reactions toward vaccination and people's hesitancy. Results are discussed considering results of other national and international studies.

Project description:ImportanceSeasonal influenza vaccination in pregnancy can reduce influenza illness among pregnant women and newborns. Evidence is limited on whether seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnancy is associated with adverse childhood health outcomes.ObjectiveTo assess the association between maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy and early childhood health outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study, using a birth registry linked with health administrative data. All live births in Nova Scotia, Canada, between October 1, 2010, and March 31, 2014, were included, with follow-up until March 31, 2016. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals were estimated while controlling for maternal medical history and other potential confounders using inverse probability of treatment weighting.ExposuresSeasonal influenza vaccination during pregnancy.Main outcomes and measuresChildhood outcomes studied were immune-related (eg, asthma, infections), non-immune-related (eg, neoplasms, sensory impairment), and nonspecific (eg, urgent or inpatient health care utilization), measured from emergency department and hospitalization databases.ResultsAmong 28 255 children (49% female, 92% born at ≥37 weeks' gestation), 10 227 (36.2%) were born to women who received seasonal influenza vaccination during pregnancy. During a mean follow-up of 3.6 years, there was no significant association between maternal influenza vaccination and childhood asthma (incidence rate, 3.0 vs 2.5 per 1000 person-years; difference, 0.53 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, -0.15 to 1.21]; adjusted HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.94 to 1.59]), neoplasms (0.32 vs 0.26 per 1000 person-years; difference, 0.06 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, -0.16 to 0.28]; adjusted HR, 1.26 [95% CI, 0.57 to 2.78]), or sensory impairment (0.80 vs 0.97 per 1000 person-years; difference, -0.17 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, -0.54 to 0.21]; adjusted HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.49 to 1.37]). Maternal influenza vaccination in pregnancy was not significantly associated with infections in early childhood (incidence rate, 184.6 vs 179.1 per 1000 person-years; difference, 5.44 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 0.01 to 10.9]; adjusted IRR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.15]) or with urgent and inpatient health services utilization (511.7 vs 477.8 per 1000 person-years; difference, 33.9 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 24.9 to 42.9]; adjusted IRR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.16]).Conclusions and relevanceIn this population-based cohort study with mean follow-up duration of 3.6 years, maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy was not significantly associated with an increased risk of adverse early childhood health outcomes.

Dataset Information

Maternal perceptions of childhood vaccination: explanations of reasons for and against vaccination.

Publications

Maternal perceptions of childhood vaccination: explanations of reasons for and against vaccination.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets