Eileen Wang1, Yelena Baras2, Alison M Buttenheim3. 1. Department of History and Sociology of Science, University of Pennsylvania, Suite 303 Claudia Cohen Hall, 249 S. 36th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: eiwang@sas.upenn.edu. 2. School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, 416 Fagin Hall, 418 Curie Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19014, USA. Electronic address: yelena.baras@gmail.com. 3. School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, 416 Fagin Hall, 418 Curie Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19014, USA. Electronic address: abutt@nursing.upenn.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although a large majority of parents vaccinate their children, vaccine hesitancy has become more widespread. It is not well understood how this culture of vaccine hesitancy has emerged and how it influences parents' decisions about vaccine schedules. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine how attitudes and beliefs of parents who self-report as pro-vaccine are developed and contribute to immunization decisions, including delaying or spacing vaccines. METHODS: Open-ended, in-depth interviews (N=23) were conducted with upper-middle class parents with young children living in Philadelphia. Interview data were coded and key themes identified related to vaccine decision-making. RESULTS: Parents who sought out vaccine information were often overwhelmed by the quantity and ambiguity when interpreting that information, and, consequently, had to rely on their own instinct or judgment to make vaccine decisions. In particular, while parents in this sample did not refuse vaccines, and described themselves as pro-vaccine, they did frequently delay or space vaccines. This experience also generated sympathy for and tolerance of vaccine hesitancy in other parents. Parents also perceived minimal severe consequences for deviating from the recommended immunization schedule. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the rise in and persistence of vaccine hesitancy and refusal are, in part, influenced by the conflicts in the information parents gather, making it difficult to interpret. Considerable deviations from the recommended vaccination schedule may manifest even within a pro-vaccine population due to this perceived ambiguity of available information and resulting tolerance for vaccine hesitancy.
BACKGROUND: Although a large majority of parents vaccinate their children, vaccine hesitancy has become more widespread. It is not well understood how this culture of vaccine hesitancy has emerged and how it influences parents' decisions about vaccine schedules. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine how attitudes and beliefs of parents who self-report as pro-vaccine are developed and contribute to immunization decisions, including delaying or spacing vaccines. METHODS: Open-ended, in-depth interviews (N=23) were conducted with upper-middle class parents with young children living in Philadelphia. Interview data were coded and key themes identified related to vaccine decision-making. RESULTS: Parents who sought out vaccine information were often overwhelmed by the quantity and ambiguity when interpreting that information, and, consequently, had to rely on their own instinct or judgment to make vaccine decisions. In particular, while parents in this sample did not refuse vaccines, and described themselves as pro-vaccine, they did frequently delay or space vaccines. This experience also generated sympathy for and tolerance of vaccine hesitancy in other parents. Parents also perceived minimal severe consequences for deviating from the recommended immunization schedule. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the rise in and persistence of vaccine hesitancy and refusal are, in part, influenced by the conflicts in the information parents gather, making it difficult to interpret. Considerable deviations from the recommended vaccination schedule may manifest even within a pro-vaccine population due to this perceived ambiguity of available information and resulting tolerance for vaccine hesitancy.
Authors: Katrina F Brown; J Simon Kroll; Michael J Hudson; Mary Ramsay; John Green; Susannah J Long; Charles A Vincent; Graham Fraser; Nick Sevdalis Journal: Vaccine Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Philip J Smith; Sharon G Humiston; Edgar K Marcuse; Zhen Zhao; Christina G Dorell; Cynthia Howes; Beth Hibbs Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2011 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: David E Sugerman; Albert E Barskey; Maryann G Delea; Ismael R Ortega-Sanchez; Daoling Bi; Kimberly J Ralston; Paul A Rota; Karen Waters-Montijo; Charles W Lebaron Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2010-03-22 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Daniel A Salmon; William K Y Pan; Saad B Omer; Ann Marie Navar; Walter Orenstein; Edgar K Marcuse; James Taylor; M Patricia deHart; Shannon Stokley; Terrell Carter; Neal A Halsey Journal: Hum Vaccin Date: 2008-02-19
Authors: Sara Cooper; Bey-Marrié Schmidt; Evanson Z Sambala; Alison Swartz; Christopher J Colvin; Natalie Leon; Charles S Wiysonge Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-10-27
Authors: Amanda Hayashida Mizuta; Guilherme de Menezes Succi; Victor Angelo Martins Montalli; Regina Célia de Menezes Succi Journal: Rev Paul Pediatr Date: 2018-08-09