Literature DB >> 32035710

An assessment of parents' childhood immunization beliefs, intentions, and behaviors using a smartphone panel.

John Boyle1, Lew Berman1, Glen J Nowak2, Ronaldo Iachan1, Deirdre Middleton3, Yangyang Deng1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: It is important to quickly identify parent beliefs, intentions, and behaviors toward childhood vaccination, especially parents of children 19 to 35 months. This paper describes parental immunization beliefs, intentions, and behaviors; assesses the relationships between beliefs and intentions regarding child immunization and actual behaviors; and assesses whether beliefs, intentions, and/or behaviors varied across demographic subgroups.
METHODS: A sample of parents, ages 18 and older, from a mobile panel with people residing in the U.S. were invited to answer immunization behavior, intention, and belief questions using a smartphone app that was not vaccine specific. 10,000 panel members with a child under 18 were sent invitations. 1029 surveys were completed by a respondent with a child 19 to 35 months. The survey instrument replicated many NIS questions and had similar sequencing.
FINDINGS: Respondents reported that most children received all recommended vaccines, except flu vaccine, suggesting some may not understand the immunization schedule. Demographics closely associated with immunization behaviors were respondents' education and household income. There is strong agreement that vaccines are effective, important to community health, and the child's health. There is concern about the number of shots received, disease prevention, and ingredient safety. Some belief remains about vaccines causing learning disabilities. Positive beliefs about the benefits of childhood vaccines and concomitant risks vary with demographics.
CONCLUSIONS: This survey provided insights into beliefs and behaviors of parents regarding childhood vaccination. It found evidence of differences in beliefs, particularly related to delaying or declining recommended childhood vaccinations. The survey was conducted in a few days and at lower cost than traditional methods. This serves as a model for health agencies where rapid results or inexpensive approaches are needed.
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attitudes and beliefs; Nonprobability sampling; Survey research; Vaccine hesitancy

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32035710     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.01.032

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


  5 in total

1.  Better Understanding Adult COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy and Refusal: The Influence of Broader Beliefs about Vaccines.

Authors:  John Boyle; Glen Nowak; Rachel Kinder; Ronaldo Iachan; James Dayton
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 4.614

2.  The effect of screening for vaccine hesitancy on the subsequent development of hesitancy: a randomized controlled trial, Houston, TX.

Authors:  Rachel M Cunningham; Danielle Guffey; Charles G Minard; Douglas J Opel; Julie A Boom
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Incidence of pediatric inflammatory bowel disease within the Vaccine Safety Datalink network and evaluation of association with rotavirus vaccination.

Authors:  Elizabeth Liles; Stephanie A Irving; Padma Dandamudi; Edward A Belongia; Matthew F Daley; Frank DeStefano; Lisa A Jackson; Steven J Jacobsen; Elyse Kharbanda; Nicola P Klein; Eric Weintraub; Allison L Naleway
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 3.641

4.  The impact of parents' health behaviours on their preferences regarding vaccinations in Bialystok, Poland.

Authors:  Jolanta Kraśnicka; Elżbieta Krajewska-Kułak; Krystyna Klimaszewska; Mateusz Cybulski; Andrzej Guzowski; Jolanta Lewko; Cecylia Łukaszuk; Krystyna Kowalczuk; Halina Doroszkiewicz; Anna Baranowska; Katarzyna Krajewska-Ferishah; Hanna Rolka; Wojciech Kułak
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2020-07-25       Impact factor: 2.125

5.  Use of a rapid electronic survey methodology to estimate blood donors' potential exposure to emerging infectious diseases: Application of a statistically representative sampling methodology to assess risk in US blood centers.

Authors:  Barbee I Whitaker; Mark Walderhaug; Susan Hinkins; Whitney R Steele; Brian Custer; Debra Kessler; German Leparc; Jerome L Gottschall; Walter Bialkowski; Susan L Stramer; Roger Y Dodd; Lauren Crowder; Farnaz Vahidnia; Beth H Shaz; Hany Kamel; Mark Rebosa; Michael Stern; Steven A Anderson
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 3.337

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.