Unknown Risks

Blaisdell, Laura; Gutheil, Caitlin; Hootsmans, Norbert; Han, Paul K. J.

doi:10.1177/0272989x15607855

Cited by 50 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many articles presented findings around the amount of information parents wanted and how they felt about the amount of vaccination information that was available or that they had received (Bond 1998; Berhanel 2000; Evans 2001; Guillaume 2004; Shui 2005; Benin 2006; Fowler 2007; Tickner 2007; Gust 2008; Miller 2008; Austvoll-Dahlgren 2010; Tickner 2010; Bond 2011; Figueiredo 2011; Harmsen 2012; Hussain 2012; Tomlinson 2013; Fadda 2015; Harmsen 2015; Blaisdell 2016; Sobo 2016). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies found that parents were dissatisfied with the amount of vaccination information that they received (Bond 1998; Evans 2001; Guillaume 2004; Shui 2005; Fowler 2007; Tickner 2007; Gust 2008; Tickner 2010; Bond 2011; Figueiredo 2011; Harmsen 2012; Hussain 2012; Tomlinson 2013; Fadda 2015; Harmsen 2015; Blaisdell 2016; Sobo 2016). Some parents felt that even though there was more information available now than previously, it was still not enough to meet their information needs (Gust 2008; Figueiredo 2011; Fadda 2015; Harmsen 2015; Sobo 2016).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This lack of information sometimes served to reinforce their concerns about vaccination (Shui 2005; Fowler 2007; Harmsen 2012; Fadda 2015; Harmsen 2015; Sobo 2016). Lack of information or inadequate answers to parents' questions and concerns led to parents feeling angry about their lack of knowledge and sometimes to have doubts about the vaccination programme (Bond 1998; Bond 2011; Hussain 2012; Fadda 2015; Blaisdell 2016). Many parents said that inadequate information had hampered their decision-making (Evans 2001; Guillaume 2004; Fowler 2007; Tomlinson 2013).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Judging the trustworthiness of information sources was a challenge for many parents (Evans 2001; Guillaume 2004; McMurray 2004; Shui 2005; Benin 2006; Fowler 2007; Hilton 2007; Tickner 2007; Austin 2008; Gust 2008; Miller 2008; Austvoll-Dahlgren 2010; Tickner 2010; Brown 2012; Harmsen 2012; Hussain 2012; Blaisdell 2016; Sobo 2016). Parent perspectives on the trustworthiness of a source varied between those who had decided to vaccinate, those questioning vaccination, and those who had decided not to vaccinate (Benin 2006; Austin 2008; Brown 2012; Sobo 2016).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence

Ames

Glenton

Lewin

2017

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

225

194

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundChildhood vaccination is an effective way to prevent serious childhood illnesses, but many children do not receive all the recommended vaccines. There are various reasons for this; some parents lack access because of poor quality health services, long distances or lack of money. Other parents may not trust vaccines or the healthcare workers who provide them, or they may not see the need for vaccination due to a lack of information or misinformation about how vaccinations work and the diseases they can prevent.Communication with parents about childhood vaccinations is one way of addressing these issues. Communication can take place at healthcare facilities, at home or in the community. Communication can be two-way, for example face-to-face discussions between parents and healthcare providers, or one-way, for instance via text messages, posters or radio programmes. Some types of communication enable parents to actively discuss vaccines and their benefits and harms, as well as diseases they can prevent. Other communication types simply give information about vaccination issues or when and where vaccines are available. People involved in vaccine programmes need to understand how parents experience different types of communication about vaccination and how this influences their decision to vaccinate.ObjectivesThe specific objectives of the review were to identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative studies exploring: parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences regarding communication about childhood vaccinations and the manner in which it is communicated; and the influence that vaccination communication has on parents' and informal caregivers' decisions regarding childhood vaccination.Search methodsWe searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), MEDLINE In-process and Other Non-Index Citations (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EbscoHOST), and Anthropology Plus (EbscoHost) databases for eligible studies from inception to 30 August 2016. We developed search strategies for each database, using guidelines developed by the Cochrane Qualitative Research Methods Group for searching for qualitative evidence as well as modified versions of the search developed for three related reviews of effectiveness. There were no date or geographic restrictions for the search.Selection criteriaWe included studies that utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on the views and experiences of parents and informal caregivers regarding information about vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where information about childhood vaccinations was communicated or distributed.Data collection and analysisWe used maximum variation purposive sampling for data synthesis, using a three-step sampling frame. We conducted a thematic analysis using a constant comparison strategy for data extraction and synthesis. We assessed our confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. High confidence suggests that it is highly likely that the review finding is a reasonable repres...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence

Ames

Glenton

Lewin

2017

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

225

194

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a study examining parental attitudes toward childhood pertussis vaccination, Meszaros and colleagues found that ambiguity in the form of expert disagreement on vaccine harms was associated with lower vaccination intentions (Meszaros et al, 1996). A qualitative study by Blaisdell and colleagues suggested that ambiguity about the outcomes of childhood immunization is an important factor in parental vaccine hesitancy (Blaisdell, Gutheil, Hootsmans, & Han, 2016). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Communication of Scientific Uncertainty about a Novel Pandemic Health Threat: Ambiguity Aversion and Its Mechanisms

Han

Zikmund‐Fisher

Duarte

et al. 2018

Journal of Health Communication

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communicating scientific uncertainty about public health threats is ethically desirable but challenging due to its tendency to promote avoidance of choice options with unknown probabilities—a phenomenon known as “ambiguity aversion.” This study examined this phenomenon’s potential magnitude, its responses to different communication strategies, and its mechanisms. In a factorial experiment, 2701 adult laypersons in Spain read one of three versions of a hypothetical newspaper article describing a pandemic vaccine-preventable disease (VPD), but varying in scientific uncertainty about VPD risk and vaccine effectiveness: No-Uncertainty, Uncertainty, and Normalized-Uncertainty (emphasizing its expected nature). Vaccination intentions were lower for the Uncertainty and Normalized-Uncertainty groups compared to the No-Uncertainty group, consistent with ambiguity aversion; Uncertainty and Normalized-Uncertainty groups did not differ. Ambiguity-averse responses were moderated by health literacy and mediated by perceptions of vaccine effectiveness, VPD likelihood, and VPD severity. Communicating scientific uncertainty about public health threats warrants caution and further research to elucidate its outcomes, mechanisms, and management.

show abstract

Clinical Practices for Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccination Among US Pediatric International Travelers

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCEThe US population is experiencing a resurgence of measles, with more than 1000 cases during the first 6 months of 2019. Imported measles cases among returning international travelers are the source of most US measles outbreaks, and these importations can be reduced with pretravel measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination of pediatric travelers. Although it is estimated that children account for less than 10% of US international travelers, pediatric travelers account for 47% of all known measles importations.OBJECTIVE To examine clinical practice regarding MMR vaccination of pediatric international travelers and to identify reasons for nonvaccination of pediatric travelers identified as MMR eligible. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis cross-sectional study of pediatric travelers (ages Ն6 months and <18 years) attending pretravel consultation at 29 sites associated with Global TravEpiNet (GTEN), a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-supported consortium of clinical sites that provide pretravel consultations, was performed from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination among MMR vaccination-eligible pediatric travelers.RESULTS Of 14 602 pretravel consultations for pediatric international travelers, 2864 travelers (19.6%; 1475 [51.5%] males; 1389 [48.5%] females) were eligible to receive pretravel MMR vaccination at the time of the consultation: 365 of 398 infants aged 6 to 12 months (91.7%), 2161 of 3623 preschool-aged travelers aged 1 to 6 years (59.6%), and 338 of 10 581 school-aged travelers aged 6 to 18 years (3.2%). Of 2864 total MMR vaccination-eligible travelers, 1182 (41.3%) received the MMR vaccine and 1682 (58.7%) did not. The MMR vaccination-eligible travelers who did not receive vaccine included 161 of 365 infants (44.1%), 1222 of 2161 preschool-aged travelers (56.5%), and 299 of 338 school-aged travelers (88.5%). We observed a diversity of clinical practice at different GTEN sites. In multivariable analysis, MMR vaccination-eligible pediatric travelers were less likely to be vaccinated at the pretravel consultation if they were school-aged

show abstract

Unknown Risks

Cited by 50 publications

References 43 publications

Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence

Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence

Communication of Scientific Uncertainty about a Novel Pandemic Health Threat: Ambiguity Aversion and Its Mechanisms

Clinical Practices for Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccination Among US Pediatric International Travelers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About