Objectives This study assessed influences on vaccination decisions among parents of young children and examined common vaccination information and advice sources. Methods Using panel samples of parents of children under 7 years, web-based surveys were conducted in 2012 (n = 2603) and 2014 (n = 2518). A vaccine decision-making typology (non-hesitant acceptors, hesitant acceptors, delayers, and refusers) was established and weighted population estimates of potential factors influencing parental vaccination decision (e.g., provider influence, source of information and advice) were computed by year and decision type. Results Delayers and refusers were more likely than acceptors to know someone whose child experienced a severe reaction to a vaccine or delayed/refused vaccine(s). High proportions of delayers (2012: 33.4%, 2014: 33.9%) and refusers (2012: 49.6%, 2014: 58.6%) reported selecting their healthcare provider based on whether the provider would allow them to delay/refuse vaccines. Providers were the most frequently reported trusted vaccine information source among all parents, though more often by acceptors than refusers (2012, 2014: p < 0.01). We found differing patterns of provider advice-seeking and internet as a reliable vaccine information source by group. Among those who had considered delay/refusal, trust in their healthcare provider’s advice was the most common reason cited for their decision reversal. Conclusions for Practice Provider trust and communication along with varying degrees of personal-network influences likely contribute to immunization decisions of parents. Vaccine hesitant parents often seek providers amenable to accommodating their vaccine beliefs. Providers may benefit from vaccine communication training as their recommendations may influence hesitant parents to immunize their children.

BackgroundAlthough black women experienced greater cervical cancer incidence and mortality rate reduction in recent years, they continue to have higher incidence rates than whites. Great variations also exist among geographic regions of the US, with the South having both the highest incidence and mortality rates compared to other regions. The present study explores the question of whether living in the South is associated with greater racial disparity in cervical cancer incidence and mortality by examining race- and region-specific rates and the trend between 2000 and 2012.MethodsThe Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 18 Program data was used. Cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates, annual percent changes, and disparity ratios were calculated using SEER*Stat software and Joinpoint regression for four groups: US14-Non-Hispanic White (NHW), US14-Non-Hispanic Black (NHB), South-NHW, and South-NHB, where South included 4 registries from Georgia and Louisiana and US14 were 14 US registries except the four South registries.ResultsThe average age-adjusted cervical cancer incidence rate was the highest among South-NHBs (11.1) and mortality rate was the highest among US14-NHBs (5.4). In 2012, the degree of racial disparities between South-NHBs and South-NHWs was greater in terms of mortality rates (NHB:NHW = 1.80:1.35) than incidence rates (NHB:NHW = 1.45:1.15). While mortality disparity ratios decreased from 2000–2012 for US14-NHB (APC: -1.9(-2.3,-1.4), mortality disparity ratios for South-NHWs (although lower than NHBs) increased compared to US14-NHW. Incidence rates for NHBs continued to increase with increasing age, whereas rates for NHWs decreased after age 40. Mortality rates for NHBs dramatically increased at age 65 compared to a relatively stable trend for NHWs. The increasing racial disparity with increasing age in terms of cervical cancer incidence rates became more pronounced when corrected for hysterectomy prevalence.ConclusionsBlack race and South region were associated with higher cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Cervical cancer rates uncorrected for hysterectomy may underestimate regional and racial disparities. Increasing incidence rates for older NHBs compared to NHWs warrant further research to determine whether screening should continue for NHBs over age 65.

Objective: We sought to examine the effectiveness of persuasive communication interventions on influenza vaccination uptake among black/African American pregnant women in Atlanta, Georgia. Methods: We recruited black/African American pregnant women ages 18 to 50 y from Atlanta, GA to participate in a prospective, randomized controlled trial of influenza immunization messaging conducted from January to April 2013. Eligible participants were randomized to 3 study arms. We conducted followup questionnaires on influenza immunization at 30-days post-partum with all groups. Chi-square and t tests evaluated group differences, and outcome intention-to-treat assessment utilized log-binomial regression models. Results: Of the 106 enrolled, 95 women completed the study (90% retention), of which 31 were randomly assigned to affective messaging intervention ("Pregnant Pause" video), 30 to cognitive messaging intervention ("Vaccines for a Healthy Pregnancy" video), and 34 to a comparison condition (receipt of the Influenza Vaccine Information Statement). The three groups were balanced on baseline demographic characteristics and reported health behaviors. At baseline, most women (63%, n D 60) reported no receipt of seasonal influenza immunization during the previous 5 y. They expressed a low likelihood (2.1 § 2.8 on 0-10 scale) of obtaining influenza immunization during their current pregnancy. At 30-days postpartum follow-up, influenza immunization was low among all participants (7-13%) demonstrating no effect after a single exposure to either affective messaging (RR D 1.10; 95% CI: 0.30-4.01) or cognitive messaging interventions (RR D 0.57; 95% CI: 0.11-2.88). Women cited various reasons for not obtaining maternal influenza immunizations. These included concern about vaccine harm (47%, n D 40), low perceived influenza infection risk (31%, n D 26), and a history of immunization nonreceipt (24%, n D 20). Conclusion: The findings reflect the limitations associated with a single exposure to varying maternal influenza immunization message approaches on vaccine behavior. For this population, repeated influenza immunization exposures may be warranted with alterations in message format, content, and relevance for coverage improvement.

No abstract