4.5 Article

Influenza and pertussis vaccination in pregnancy: Portrayal in online media articles and perceptions of pregnant women and healthcare professionals

期刊

VACCINE
卷 36, 期 50, 页码 7625-7631

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.10.092

关键词

Vaccination; Pregnancy; Maternal; Media; Confidence; Decision-making

资金

  1. British Paediatric Allergy Immunity and Infection Group (BPAIIG)
  2. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  3. Center for Strategic and International Studies
  4. EU Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI)
  5. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)
  6. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
  7. Novartis
  8. World Health Organization (WHO)
  9. IMmunising PRegnant women and INfants neTwork (IMPRINT)
  10. GCRF Networks in Vaccines Research and Development
  11. MRC
  12. BBSRC
  13. National Vaccine Program Office (NVPO)
  14. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1119788]
  15. Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in pregnancy (GALA)
  16. NIHR under its Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) Programme [PB-PG-0215-36120]
  17. National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR) [PB-PG-0215-36120] Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR)
  18. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1119788] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Online media may influence women's decision to undergo vaccination during pregnancy. The aims of this mixed-methods study were to: (1) examine the portrayal of maternal vaccination in online media and (2) establish the perceived target of vaccine protection as viewed by pregnant women and maternity healthcare professionals (HCPs). Methods: Online media articles on maternal vaccination (published July-December 2012 or November 2015-April 2016) were identified through the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine's Vaccine Confidence Database and thematically analysed. Questionnaires for pregnant women and HCPs were distributed within four English hospitals (July 2017-January 2018). Results: Of 203 articles identified, 60% related to pertussis vaccination, 33% to influenza and 6% both. The majority positively portrayed vaccination in pregnancy (97%), but inaccurate, negative articles persist which criticize pertussis vaccination's safety and efficacy. Positively-worded articles about pertussis tended to focus on infant protection and highlight examples of recent cases, whereas positively-worded articles about influenza focused on maternal protection. These themes were reflected in questionnaire responses from 314 pregnant women and 204 HCPs, who perceived pertussis vaccination as protecting the baby, and influenza vaccination as protecting the mother, or mother and baby equally. A minority of the pregnant women surveyed intended to decline influenza (22%) or pertussis (8%) vaccination. Conclusions: The majority of online articles support pertussis and influenza vaccination during pregnancy. The portrayal of pertussis vaccination as primarily benefiting the child, using real-examples, may influence its higher uptake compared with influenza. This approach should be considered by HCPs when recommending vaccination. HCPs should be prepared to provide advice to women hesitant about vaccination, including addressing any negative media, and consider educational strategies to counteract inaccurate information. Future studies should directly assess the influence of media on vaccine decision-making and establish which media platforms are typically used by pregnant women to gather information. (C) 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据