LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

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

Photo by charlesdeluvio from unsplash

OBJECTIVE In light of the decline in childhood vaccination coverage, the question rises concerning what factors play a role in informed decision-making about childhood vaccination. Insight into factors related to… Click to show full abstract

OBJECTIVE In light of the decline in childhood vaccination coverage, the question rises concerning what factors play a role in informed decision-making about childhood vaccination. Insight into factors related to this decision helps us to support parents' informed decision-making about childhood vaccination. METHOD We conducted 12 semi-structured focus group interviews across the Netherlands based on a definition of informed decision-making: three with acceptors, three with refusers, and six with partial acceptors to ask about knowledge, attitudes, deliberation, and information needs. We performed a thematic analysis of the transcripts. RESULTS Acceptors viewed the decision to participate in the National Immunization Program (NIP) as self-evident. Refusers and partial acceptors, however, reported to extensively deliberate the pros and cons of accepting or refusing the NIP in much detail. Their answers indicated that their knowledge was not always evidence-based. In addition, refusers and partial acceptors perceived fewer risks of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), more risks of side-effects of vaccines, less social support from their environment, less trust in child welfare centers (CWCs), and information provided than acceptors. CONCLUSION We observed distinct differences in factors related to decision-making about childhood vaccination between acceptors, refusers, and partial acceptors. Acceptors in the current study perceived accepting childhood vaccinations as self-evident, refusers relied mostly on anecdotal information rather than evidence-based information to weigh up the pros and cons vaccines and the VPDs, and partial acceptors elaborately deliberated the pros and cons of each vaccine and VPD individually, which was time-consuming and difficult. To strengthen and support decision-making among parents, more elaborate dialogues are needed between Child Vaccine Providers (CVPs) and parents. These discussions could build trust between parents and CVPs, be used to discuss the evidence-based advantages of childhood vaccinations, and to decrease parents' susceptibility to anecdotal information and misperceptions about childhood vaccinations shared by other parents.

Keywords: decision; childhood vaccination; informed decision; partial acceptors; decision making

Journal Title: Vaccine
Year Published: 2019

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.