Cargando…

The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research

BACKGROUND: During pandemics, health authorities may be uncertain about the spread and severity of the disease and the effectiveness and safety of available interventions. This was the case during the swine flu (H1N1) pandemic of 2009–2010, and governments were forced to make decisions despite these...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carlsen, Benedicte, Glenton, Claire
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4919843/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27338141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1466-7
_version_ 1782439307225595904
author Carlsen, Benedicte
Glenton, Claire
author_facet Carlsen, Benedicte
Glenton, Claire
author_sort Carlsen, Benedicte
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: During pandemics, health authorities may be uncertain about the spread and severity of the disease and the effectiveness and safety of available interventions. This was the case during the swine flu (H1N1) pandemic of 2009–2010, and governments were forced to make decisions despite these uncertainties. While many countries chose to implement wide scale vaccination programmes, few accomplished their vaccination goals. Many research studies aiming to explore barriers and facilitators to vaccine uptake have been conducted in the aftermath of the pandemic, including several qualitative studies. AIMS: 1. To explore public attitudes to the swine flu vaccine in different countries through a review of qualitative primary studies. 2. To describe and discuss the implications drawn by the primary study authors. METHODS: Systematic review of qualitative research studies, using a broadly comparative cross case-study approach. Study quality was appraised using an adaptation of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) quality assessment tool. RESULTS: The review indicates that the public had varying opinions about disease risk and prevalence and had concerns about vaccine safety. Most primary study authors concluded that participants were uninformed, and that more information about the disease and the vaccine would have led to an increase in vaccine uptake. We find these conclusions problematic. We suggest instead that people’s questions and concerns were legitimate given the uncertainties of the situation at the time and the fact that the authorities did not have the necessary information to convince the public. Our quality assessment of the included studies points to a lack of reflexivity and a lack of information about study context. We suggest that these study weaknesses are tied to primary study authors’ lack of acknowledgement of the uncertainties surrounding the disease and the vaccine. CONCLUSION: While primary study authors suggest that authorities could increase vaccine uptake through increased information, we suggest instead that health authorities should be more transparent in their information and decision-making processes in future pandemic situations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1466-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4919843
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49198432016-06-25 The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research Carlsen, Benedicte Glenton, Claire BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: During pandemics, health authorities may be uncertain about the spread and severity of the disease and the effectiveness and safety of available interventions. This was the case during the swine flu (H1N1) pandemic of 2009–2010, and governments were forced to make decisions despite these uncertainties. While many countries chose to implement wide scale vaccination programmes, few accomplished their vaccination goals. Many research studies aiming to explore barriers and facilitators to vaccine uptake have been conducted in the aftermath of the pandemic, including several qualitative studies. AIMS: 1. To explore public attitudes to the swine flu vaccine in different countries through a review of qualitative primary studies. 2. To describe and discuss the implications drawn by the primary study authors. METHODS: Systematic review of qualitative research studies, using a broadly comparative cross case-study approach. Study quality was appraised using an adaptation of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) quality assessment tool. RESULTS: The review indicates that the public had varying opinions about disease risk and prevalence and had concerns about vaccine safety. Most primary study authors concluded that participants were uninformed, and that more information about the disease and the vaccine would have led to an increase in vaccine uptake. We find these conclusions problematic. We suggest instead that people’s questions and concerns were legitimate given the uncertainties of the situation at the time and the fact that the authorities did not have the necessary information to convince the public. Our quality assessment of the included studies points to a lack of reflexivity and a lack of information about study context. We suggest that these study weaknesses are tied to primary study authors’ lack of acknowledgement of the uncertainties surrounding the disease and the vaccine. CONCLUSION: While primary study authors suggest that authorities could increase vaccine uptake through increased information, we suggest instead that health authorities should be more transparent in their information and decision-making processes in future pandemic situations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1466-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-06-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4919843/ /pubmed/27338141 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1466-7 Text en © Carlsen and Glenton. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Carlsen, Benedicte
Glenton, Claire
The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research
title The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research
title_full The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research
title_fullStr The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research
title_full_unstemmed The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research
title_short The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research
title_sort swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4919843/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27338141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1466-7
work_keys_str_mv AT carlsenbenedicte theswinefluvaccinepublicattitudesandresearcherinterpretationsasystematicreviewofqualitativeresearch
AT glentonclaire theswinefluvaccinepublicattitudesandresearcherinterpretationsasystematicreviewofqualitativeresearch
AT carlsenbenedicte swinefluvaccinepublicattitudesandresearcherinterpretationsasystematicreviewofqualitativeresearch
AT glentonclaire swinefluvaccinepublicattitudesandresearcherinterpretationsasystematicreviewofqualitativeresearch