Pediatricians’ Preferences for Infant Meningococcal Vaccination

Poulos, Christine; Krishnarajah, Girishanthy; Anonychuk, Andrea; Misurski, Derek

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2014.10.010

Cited by 23 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study also found that price was an important attribute driving preferences which is in line with previous research [9, 11, 31, 50, 51]. Recommended but non-publicly funded vaccines were more likely to be refused by parents due to the price [50].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adolescent values for immunisation programs in Australia: A discrete choice experiment

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe importance of adolescent engagement in health decisions and public health programs such as immunisation is becoming increasingly recognised. Understanding adolescent preferences and further identifying barriers and facilitators for immunisation acceptance is critical to the success of adolescent immunisation programs. This study applied a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to assess vaccination preferences in adolescents.MethodsThis study was conducted as a cross-sectional, national online survey in Australian adolescents. The DCE survey evaluated adolescent vaccination preferences. Six attributes were assessed including disease severity, target for protection, price, location of vaccination provision, potential side effects and vaccine delivery method. A mixed logit model was used to analyse DCE data.ResultsThis survey was conducted between December 2014 and January 2015. Of 800 adolescents aged 15 to 19 years, stronger preferences were observed overall for: vaccination in the case of a life threatening illness (p<0.001), lower price vaccinations (p<0.001), mild but common side effects (p = 0.004), delivery via a skin patch (p<0.001) and being administered by a family practitioner (p<0.001). Participants suggested that they and their families would be willing to pay AU$394.28 (95%CI: AU$348.40 to AU$446.92) more for a vaccine targeting a life threatening illness than a mild-moderate illness, AU$37.94 (95%CI: AU$19.22 to AU$57.39) more for being vaccinated at a family practitioner clinic than a council immunisation clinic, AU$23.01 (95%CI: AU$7.12 to AU$39.24) more for common but mild and resolving side effects compared to rare but serious side effects, and AU$51.80 (95%CI: AU$30.42 to AU$73.70) more for delivery via a skin patch than injection.ConclusionsConsideration of adolescent preferences may result in improved acceptance of, engagement in and uptake of immunisation programs targeted for this age group.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…A positive (negative) and significant coefficient indicates a positive (negative) preference for a specific attribute level. The coefficient estimates (or preference weights) can also be used to compare relative importance between different levels of the same attribute or between levels of completely different attributes [11]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adolescent values for immunisation programs in Australia: A discrete choice experiment

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There were no incentives offered to those who participated in the survey. A sample size of 361 HCWs was calculated by using single population proportion formula with the assumption that 17% of HCWs [ 17 , 20 , 21 , 22 ] would recommend meningococcal vaccinations, a confidence level of 95%, a margin of error at 5%, and a response rate of 60%. The questionnaire, developed by the research team, and based on previously validated questionnaires [ 19 , 23 ], was pilot tested prior to the beginning of the survey in order to ensure that the questions were understood as intended and to omit or reformulate the questions that were misinterpreted.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, most studies evaluating knowledge, attitudes and behaviors about meningococcal disease and related vaccinations have been conducted in the general population [ 17 , 18 , 19 ], or general practitioners (GPs) and paediatricians [ 17 , 20 , 21 ], whereas, to the best of our knowledge, there are no investigations that have been focused on HCWs who provide care to these patients for their underlying medical conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meningococcal Disease and Related Vaccinations: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices among Healthcare Workers Who Provide Care to Patients with Underlying High-Risk Medical Conditions

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This cross-sectional study assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding meningococcal disease and related vaccinations among healthcare workers (HCWs) who provided care to patients with underlying high-risk medical conditions. A total of 411 HCWs returned the survey. Only 35% of the respondents had a good knowledge about the incidence and lethality of meningococcal disease, the most frequent serogroups in Italy and the diseases or conditions that expose patients to a high-risk of severe complications caused by meningococcal disease. Vaccination against meningococcal disease was perceived to be highly effective by 38.4% of participants, very safe by 36.2%, and 82% agreed or strongly agreed that HCWs should promote adherence to recommended vaccinations even in hesitant patients. Moreover, 34.1% recommended meningococcal vaccinations to all eligible patients and the results of the multivariate analysis showed that older HCWs, who work in pediatric/neonatal wards, have good knowledge about meningococcal vaccinations, have a favourable attitude towards vaccinations, and do not need additional information about meningococcal vaccinations, were more likely to recommend meningococcal vaccinations to all eligible patients. Interventions aimed at the enhancement of knowledge and awareness of HCWs who provide care to these patients on the benefits of meningococcal vaccinations are warranted.

show abstract

“…A possible reason for this result is inattention to the absolute values of continuous attributes [54]. Some discrete-choice experiment applications in health have found evidence for such inattention [55], while others have not [56]. Good survey design practices can mitigate the problem of inattentive respondents [57].…”

Section: Number Of Attributes and Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Choice Experiments to Quantify Preferences for Health and Healthcare: State of the Practice

Mühlbacher

Johnson

2016

Appl Health Econ Health Policy

133

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stated-preference methods increasingly are used to quantify preferences in health economics, health technology assessment, benefit-risk analysis and health services research. The objective of stated-preference studies is to acquire information about trade-off preferences among treatment outcomes, prioritization of clinical decision criteria, likely uptake or adherence to healthcare products and acceptability of healthcare services or policies. A widely accepted approach to eliciting preferences is discrete-choice experiments. Patient, physician, insurant or general-public respondents choose among constructed, experimentally controlled alternatives described by decision-relevant features or attributes. Attributes can represent complete health states, sets of treatment outcomes or characteristics of a healthcare system. The observed pattern of choice reveals how different respondents or groups of respondents implicitly weigh, value and assess different characteristics of treatments, products or services. An important advantage of choice experiments is their foundation in microeconomic utility theory. This conceptual framework provides tests of internal validity, guidance for statistical analysis of latent preference structures, and testable behavioural hypotheses. Choice experiments require expertise in survey-research methods, random-utility theory, experimental design and advanced statistical analysis. This paper should be understood as an introduction to setting up a basic experiment rather than an exhaustive critique of the latest findings and procedures. Where appropriate, we have identified topics of active research where a broad consensus has not yet been established.

show abstract

Pediatricians’ Preferences for Infant Meningococcal Vaccination

Abstract: Physicians' responses indicate a strong preference for infant meningococcal vaccination.

Cited by 23 publications

References 40 publications

Adolescent values for immunisation programs in Australia: A discrete choice experiment

Adolescent values for immunisation programs in Australia: A discrete choice experiment

Meningococcal Disease and Related Vaccinations: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices among Healthcare Workers Who Provide Care to Patients with Underlying High-Risk Medical Conditions

Choice Experiments to Quantify Preferences for Health and Healthcare: State of the Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About