Literature DB >> 30683509

Do superstitious beliefs affect influenza vaccine uptake through shaping health beliefs?

Jiahui Lu1, Meiyin Luo2, Andrew Zi Han Yee2, Anita Sheldenkar2, Jerrald Lau3, May Oo Lwin2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study examined the impact of superstitious beliefs on influenza vaccine uptake and investigated the role of health beliefs as underlying psychological mechanisms. It is hypothesized that superstitious beliefs predict greater perceived risks in influenza and vaccines, which in turn affect influenza vaccine uptake.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of Singaporeans and Singapore Permanent Residents aged between 21 and 70 (N = 668) was conducted using computer-assisted telephone interviews. The survey covered beliefs in superstition, health beliefs in influenza and vaccines, and influenza vaccine uptake intention and behavior using the Health Belief Model. Path analysis was adopted to examine the hypothesized model.
RESULTS: Approximately 60% of the sample had never obtained influenza vaccination. The path analysis found that superstitious beliefs significantly predicted higher perceived barriers and lower perceived benefits of vaccines, which in turn predicted a lower intention to take influenza vaccine in the next year and/or a lower probability of ever taking influenza vaccine. In contrast, superstitious beliefs predicted higher perceived susceptibility and severity of influenza that in turn predicted higher influenza vaccine uptake intention and/or probability. Examining demographic variables and past experience on influenza as control and confounding factors did not significantly affect the results.
CONCLUSION: The findings imply that beliefs in superstitions can have mixed effects on vaccine uptake and intention through shaping beliefs of the disease and vaccines. Significant implications in health education and persuasion on vaccine uptake are discussed.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Health belief model; Influenza; Superstition; Vaccine uptake

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30683509     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.01.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vaccine        ISSN: 0264-410X            Impact factor:   3.641


  6 in total

Review 1.  A decade of antimicrobial resistance research in social science fields: a scientometric review.

Authors:  Jiahui Lu; Anita Sheldenkar; May Oo Lwin
Journal:  Antimicrob Resist Infect Control       Date:  2020-11-04       Impact factor: 4.887

Review 2.  Examining the barriers of influenza vaccine hesitancy in persons with dementia: a literature review.

Authors:  Bahar Ashtarieh; Magda Grabkowski; Emma Bartfay; Winnie Sun
Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res       Date:  2021-07-28       Impact factor: 4.481

3.  The community residents' NIMBY attitude on the construction of community ageing care service centres: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Bo Yu; Yue-Hong Han; Yin Sun; Xu-Dong Zhang
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  How News Agencies' Twitter Posts on COVID-19 Vaccines Attract Audiences' Twitter Engagement: A Content Analysis.

Authors:  Di Wang; Jiahui Lu
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Understanding breast cancer risk factors: is there any mismatch between laywomen perceptions and expert opinions.

Authors:  E Manouchehri; A Taghipour; A Ebadi; F Homaei Shandiz; R Latifnejad Roudsari
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  Vaccine confidence is higher in more religious countries.

Authors:  Kimmo Eriksson; Irina Vartanova
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 3.452

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.