Cargando…
Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review
Vaccine acceptance depends on public trust and confidence in the safety and efficacy of vaccines and immunization, the health system, healthcare professionals and the wider vaccine research community. This systematic review analyses the current breadth and depth of vaccine research literature that e...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6067893/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29617183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2018.1459252 |
_version_ | 1783343186366693376 |
---|---|
author | Larson, Heidi J. Clarke, Richard M. Jarrett, Caitlin Eckersberger, Elisabeth Levine, Zachary Schulz, Will S. Paterson, Pauline |
author_facet | Larson, Heidi J. Clarke, Richard M. Jarrett, Caitlin Eckersberger, Elisabeth Levine, Zachary Schulz, Will S. Paterson, Pauline |
author_sort | Larson, Heidi J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Vaccine acceptance depends on public trust and confidence in the safety and efficacy of vaccines and immunization, the health system, healthcare professionals and the wider vaccine research community. This systematic review analyses the current breadth and depth of vaccine research literature that explicitly refers to the concept of trust within their stated aims or research questions. After duplicates were removed, 19,643 articles were screened by title and abstract. Of these 2,779 were screened by full text, 35 of which were included in the final analysis. These studies examined a range of trust relationships as they pertain to vaccination, including trust in healthcare professionals, the health system, the government, and friends and family members. Three studies examined generalized trust. Findings indicated that trust is often referred to implicitly (19/35), rather than explicitly examined in the context of a formal definition or discussion of the existing literature on trust in a health context. Within the quantitative research analysed, trust was commonly measured with a single-item measure (9/25). Only two studies used validated multi-item measures of trust. Three studies examined changes in trust, either following an intervention or over the course of a pandemic. The findings of this review indicate a disconnect between the current vaccine hesitancy research and the wider health-related trust literature, a dearth in research on trust in low and middle-income settings, a need for studies on how trust levels change over time and investigations on how resilience to trust-eroding information can be built into a trustworthy health system. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6067893 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Taylor & Francis |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60678932018-08-06 Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review Larson, Heidi J. Clarke, Richard M. Jarrett, Caitlin Eckersberger, Elisabeth Levine, Zachary Schulz, Will S. Paterson, Pauline Hum Vaccin Immunother Reviews Vaccine acceptance depends on public trust and confidence in the safety and efficacy of vaccines and immunization, the health system, healthcare professionals and the wider vaccine research community. This systematic review analyses the current breadth and depth of vaccine research literature that explicitly refers to the concept of trust within their stated aims or research questions. After duplicates were removed, 19,643 articles were screened by title and abstract. Of these 2,779 were screened by full text, 35 of which were included in the final analysis. These studies examined a range of trust relationships as they pertain to vaccination, including trust in healthcare professionals, the health system, the government, and friends and family members. Three studies examined generalized trust. Findings indicated that trust is often referred to implicitly (19/35), rather than explicitly examined in the context of a formal definition or discussion of the existing literature on trust in a health context. Within the quantitative research analysed, trust was commonly measured with a single-item measure (9/25). Only two studies used validated multi-item measures of trust. Three studies examined changes in trust, either following an intervention or over the course of a pandemic. The findings of this review indicate a disconnect between the current vaccine hesitancy research and the wider health-related trust literature, a dearth in research on trust in low and middle-income settings, a need for studies on how trust levels change over time and investigations on how resilience to trust-eroding information can be built into a trustworthy health system. Taylor & Francis 2018-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6067893/ /pubmed/29617183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2018.1459252 Text en © 2018 Taylor & Francis http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. |
spellingShingle | Reviews Larson, Heidi J. Clarke, Richard M. Jarrett, Caitlin Eckersberger, Elisabeth Levine, Zachary Schulz, Will S. Paterson, Pauline Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review |
title | Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review |
title_full | Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review |
title_fullStr | Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review |
title_short | Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review |
title_sort | measuring trust in vaccination: a systematic review |
topic | Reviews |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6067893/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29617183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2018.1459252 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT larsonheidij measuringtrustinvaccinationasystematicreview AT clarkerichardm measuringtrustinvaccinationasystematicreview AT jarrettcaitlin measuringtrustinvaccinationasystematicreview AT eckersbergerelisabeth measuringtrustinvaccinationasystematicreview AT levinezachary measuringtrustinvaccinationasystematicreview AT schulzwills measuringtrustinvaccinationasystematicreview AT patersonpauline measuringtrustinvaccinationasystematicreview |