4.5 Article

Development of a survey to identify vaccine-hesitant parents The parent attitudes about childhood vaccines survey

期刊

HUMAN VACCINES
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 419-425

出版社

LANDES BIOSCIENCE
DOI: 10.4161/hv.7.4.14120

关键词

pediatrics; vaccination; public health practice; preventive health services; questionnaires

资金

  1. Seattle Children's Center for Clinical and Translational Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To develop a survey to accurately assess parental vaccine hesitancy. Results: The initial survey contained 17 items in 4 content domains: (1) immunization behavior; (2) beliefs about vaccine safety and efficacy; (3) attitudes about vaccine mandates and exemptions; and (4) trust. Focus group data yielded an additional 10 survey items. Expert review of the survey resulted in the deletion of 9 of 27 items and revisions to 11 of the remaining 18 survey items. Parent pretesting resulted in the deletion of 1 item, the addition of 1 item, the revision of 4 items, and formatting changes to enhance usability. The final survey contains 18 items in the original 4 content domains. Methods: An iterative process was used to develop the survey. First, we reviewed previous studies and surveys on parental health beliefs regarding vaccination to develop content domains and draft initial survey items. Focus groups of parents and pediatricians generated additional themes and survey items. Six immunization experts reviewed the items in the resulting draft survey and ranked them on a 1-5 scale for significance in identifying vaccine-hesitant parents (5 indicative of a highly significant item). The lowest third of ranked items were dropped. The revised survey was pretested with 25 parents to assess face validity, usability and item understandability. Conclusions: The Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines survey was constructed using qualitative methodology to identify vaccine-hesitant parents and has content and face validity. Further psychometric testing is needed.

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