Cargando…
What Is the State-of-the-Art in Clinical Trials on Vaccine Hesitancy 2015–2020?
Background: Vaccine hesitancy is related to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination. Aim: to perform a systematic review of clinical trials on vaccine hesitancy (2015–2020). Methods: a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8065658/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33916427 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9040348 |
_version_ | 1783682392522752000 |
---|---|
author | Pires, Carla |
author_facet | Pires, Carla |
author_sort | Pires, Carla |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Vaccine hesitancy is related to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination. Aim: to perform a systematic review of clinical trials on vaccine hesitancy (2015–2020). Methods: a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria (PRISMA). Five databases were screened—PubMed, Cochrane Library, DOAJ, SciELO and b-on—which comprise multiple resources. Keywords: “Vaccine hesitancy” and (“randomized controlled trial” or “clinical trial”). Inclusion criteria: trials about “vaccine hesitancy” enrolling patients and/or health professionals (2015–2020). Exclusion criteria: studies about other topics, repeated and qualitative studies, reviews and papers written in languages other than English, Portuguese, French or Spanish. Results: a total of 35 trials out of 90 were selected (19 PubMed, 14 Cochrane Library, 0 DOAJ, 0 SciELO and 2 b-on). Selected trials were classified into five topics: children/pediatric (n = 5); online or electronic information (n = 5); vaccination against a specific disease (n = 15) (e.g., influenza or COVID-2019); miscellaneous (n = 4); and educational strategies (n = 6). Conclusion: the provision of online or electronic information (e.g., through virtual reality, social websites of experts, or apps), communication-based interventions and training of health professionals, residents or subjects seemed to improve vaccine hesitancy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8065658 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80656582021-04-25 What Is the State-of-the-Art in Clinical Trials on Vaccine Hesitancy 2015–2020? Pires, Carla Vaccines (Basel) Review Background: Vaccine hesitancy is related to a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination. Aim: to perform a systematic review of clinical trials on vaccine hesitancy (2015–2020). Methods: a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria (PRISMA). Five databases were screened—PubMed, Cochrane Library, DOAJ, SciELO and b-on—which comprise multiple resources. Keywords: “Vaccine hesitancy” and (“randomized controlled trial” or “clinical trial”). Inclusion criteria: trials about “vaccine hesitancy” enrolling patients and/or health professionals (2015–2020). Exclusion criteria: studies about other topics, repeated and qualitative studies, reviews and papers written in languages other than English, Portuguese, French or Spanish. Results: a total of 35 trials out of 90 were selected (19 PubMed, 14 Cochrane Library, 0 DOAJ, 0 SciELO and 2 b-on). Selected trials were classified into five topics: children/pediatric (n = 5); online or electronic information (n = 5); vaccination against a specific disease (n = 15) (e.g., influenza or COVID-2019); miscellaneous (n = 4); and educational strategies (n = 6). Conclusion: the provision of online or electronic information (e.g., through virtual reality, social websites of experts, or apps), communication-based interventions and training of health professionals, residents or subjects seemed to improve vaccine hesitancy. MDPI 2021-04-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8065658/ /pubmed/33916427 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9040348 Text en © 2021 by the author. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Pires, Carla What Is the State-of-the-Art in Clinical Trials on Vaccine Hesitancy 2015–2020? |
title | What Is the State-of-the-Art in Clinical Trials on Vaccine Hesitancy 2015–2020? |
title_full | What Is the State-of-the-Art in Clinical Trials on Vaccine Hesitancy 2015–2020? |
title_fullStr | What Is the State-of-the-Art in Clinical Trials on Vaccine Hesitancy 2015–2020? |
title_full_unstemmed | What Is the State-of-the-Art in Clinical Trials on Vaccine Hesitancy 2015–2020? |
title_short | What Is the State-of-the-Art in Clinical Trials on Vaccine Hesitancy 2015–2020? |
title_sort | what is the state-of-the-art in clinical trials on vaccine hesitancy 2015–2020? |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8065658/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33916427 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9040348 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pirescarla whatisthestateoftheartinclinicaltrialsonvaccinehesitancy20152020 |