Cargando…

Current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION: Vaccine hesitancy, defined as the delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services is responsible in part for suboptimal levels of vaccination coverage worldwide. The WHO recommends that countries incorporate plans to measure and address vaccin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oduwole, Elizabeth O, Pienaar, Elizabeth D, Mahomed, Hassan, Wiysonge, Charles Shey
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6924801/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31831547
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033245
_version_ 1783481792377913344
author Oduwole, Elizabeth O
Pienaar, Elizabeth D
Mahomed, Hassan
Wiysonge, Charles Shey
author_facet Oduwole, Elizabeth O
Pienaar, Elizabeth D
Mahomed, Hassan
Wiysonge, Charles Shey
author_sort Oduwole, Elizabeth O
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Vaccine hesitancy, defined as the delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services is responsible in part for suboptimal levels of vaccination coverage worldwide. The WHO recommends that countries incorporate plans to measure and address vaccine hesitancy into their immunisation programmes. This requires that governments and health institutions be able to detect concerns about vaccination in the population and monitor changes in vaccination behaviours. To do this effectively, tools to detect and measure vaccine hesitancy are required. The purpose of this scoping review is to give a broad overview of currently available vaccine hesitancy measuring tools and present a summary of their nature, similarities and differences. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review will be conducted using the framework for scoping review proffered by Arksey and O’Malley. It will comply with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews’ guidelines. The broader research question of this review is: what vaccine hesitancy measuring tools are currently available? Search strategies will be developed using controlled vocabulary and selected keywords. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and reference lists of relevant publications will be searched. Titles and abstracts will be independently screened by two authors and data from full-text articles meeting the inclusion criteria will be extracted independently by two authors using a pretested data charting form. Discrepancies will be resolved by discussion and consensus. Results will be presented using descriptive statistics such as percentages, tables, charts and flow diagrams as appropriate. Narrative analysis will be used to summarise the findings of the review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for the review. It will be submitted as part of a doctoral thesis, presented at conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://osf.io/x8fjk/
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6924801
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69248012020-01-02 Current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol Oduwole, Elizabeth O Pienaar, Elizabeth D Mahomed, Hassan Wiysonge, Charles Shey BMJ Open Public Health INTRODUCTION: Vaccine hesitancy, defined as the delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services is responsible in part for suboptimal levels of vaccination coverage worldwide. The WHO recommends that countries incorporate plans to measure and address vaccine hesitancy into their immunisation programmes. This requires that governments and health institutions be able to detect concerns about vaccination in the population and monitor changes in vaccination behaviours. To do this effectively, tools to detect and measure vaccine hesitancy are required. The purpose of this scoping review is to give a broad overview of currently available vaccine hesitancy measuring tools and present a summary of their nature, similarities and differences. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review will be conducted using the framework for scoping review proffered by Arksey and O’Malley. It will comply with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews’ guidelines. The broader research question of this review is: what vaccine hesitancy measuring tools are currently available? Search strategies will be developed using controlled vocabulary and selected keywords. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and reference lists of relevant publications will be searched. Titles and abstracts will be independently screened by two authors and data from full-text articles meeting the inclusion criteria will be extracted independently by two authors using a pretested data charting form. Discrepancies will be resolved by discussion and consensus. Results will be presented using descriptive statistics such as percentages, tables, charts and flow diagrams as appropriate. Narrative analysis will be used to summarise the findings of the review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for the review. It will be submitted as part of a doctoral thesis, presented at conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://osf.io/x8fjk/ BMJ Publishing Group 2019-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6924801/ /pubmed/31831547 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033245 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Public Health
Oduwole, Elizabeth O
Pienaar, Elizabeth D
Mahomed, Hassan
Wiysonge, Charles Shey
Current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol
title Current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol
title_full Current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol
title_fullStr Current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol
title_full_unstemmed Current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol
title_short Current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol
title_sort current tools available for investigating vaccine hesitancy: a scoping review protocol
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6924801/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31831547
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033245
work_keys_str_mv AT oduwoleelizabetho currenttoolsavailableforinvestigatingvaccinehesitancyascopingreviewprotocol
AT pienaarelizabethd currenttoolsavailableforinvestigatingvaccinehesitancyascopingreviewprotocol
AT mahomedhassan currenttoolsavailableforinvestigatingvaccinehesitancyascopingreviewprotocol
AT wiysongecharlesshey currenttoolsavailableforinvestigatingvaccinehesitancyascopingreviewprotocol