Asymmetric participation of defenders and critics of vaccines to debates on French-speaking Twitter

For more than a decade, doubt about vaccines has become an increasingly important global issue. Polarization of opinions on this matter, especially through social media, has been repeatedly observed, but details about the balance of forces are left unclear. In this paper, we analyse the flow of information on vaccines on the French-speaking realm of Twitter between 2016 and 2017. Two major asymmetries appear. Rather than opposing themselves on each vaccine-related controversy, pro and anti-vaccine accounts focus on different vaccines and vaccine-related topics. Pro-vaccine accounts focus on hopes for new groundbreaking vaccines and on ongoing outbreaks of vaccine-preventable illnesses. Vaccine critics concentrate their posts on a limited number of controversial vaccines and adjuvants. Furthermore, vaccine-critical accounts display greater craft and energy, using a wider variety of sources, and a more coordinated set of hashtags. This double asymmetry can have serious consequences. Despite the presence of a large number of pro-vaccine accounts, some arguments raised by efficiently organized and very active vaccine-critical activists are left unanswered

Does the use of the 2009 FIGO classification of endometrial cancer impact on indications of the sentinel node biopsy?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Lymphadenectomy is debated in early stages endometrial cancer. Moreover, a new FIGO classification of endometrial cancer, merging stages IA and IB has been recently published. Therefore, the aims of the present study was to evaluate the relevance of the sentinel node (SN) procedure in women with endometrial cancer and to discuss whether the use of the 2009 FIGO classification could modify the indications for SN procedure.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Eighty-five patients with endometrial cancer underwent the SN procedure followed by pelvic lymphadenectomy. SNs were detected with a dual or single labelling method in 74 and 11 cases, respectively. All SNs were analysed by both H&E staining and immunohistochemistry. Presumed stage before surgery was assessed for all patients based on MR imaging features using the 1988 FIGO classification and the 2009 FIGO classification.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>An SN was detected in 88.2% of cases (75/85 women). Among the fourteen patients with lymph node metastases one-half were detected by serial sectioning and immunohistochemical analysis. There were no false negative case. Using the 1988 FIGO classification and the 2009 FIGO classification, the correlation between preoperative MRI staging and final histology was moderate with Kappa = 0.24 and Kappa = 0.45, respectively. None of the patients with grade 1 endometrioid carcinoma on biopsy and IA 2009 FIGO stage on MR imaging exhibited positive SN. In patients with grade 2-3 endometrioid carcinoma and stage IA on MR imaging, the rate of positive SN reached 16.6% with an incidence of micrometastases of 50%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The present study suggests that sentinel node biopsy is an adequate technique to evaluate lymph node status. The use of the 2009 FIGO classification increases the accuracy of MR imaging to stage patients with early stages of endometrial cancer and contributes to clarify the indication of SN biopsy according to tumour grade and histological type.</p

France's citizen consultation on vaccination and the challenges of participatory democracy in health

International audienceBACKGROUND:Confronted with a rise in vaccine hesitancy, public health officials increasingly try to involve the public in the policy decision-making process to foster consensus and public acceptability. In public debates and citizen consultations tensions can arise between the principles of science and of democracy. To illustrate this, we analyzed the 2016 citizen consultation on vaccination organized in France. This consultation led to the decision to extend mandatory vaccination.METHODS:The analysis combines qualitative and quantitative methods. We analyze the organization of the consultation and its reception using the documents provided by its organizing committee, articles of newsmedia and the contents of 299 vaccine-critical websites. Using methods from computational linguistics, we investigate the 10435 public comments posted to the consultation's official website.RESULTS:The combination of a narrow framing of debates (how to restore trust in vaccination and raise vaccination coverages) and a specific organization (latitude was given to the orientation committee with a strong presence of medical experts) was successful in avoiding legitimizing vaccine critical arguments. But these choices have been at the expense of a real reflection on the acceptability of mandatory vaccination and it did not quell vaccine-critical mobilizations.CONCLUSIONS:Public health officials must be aware that when trying to increase democratic participation into their decision-making process, how they balance inputs from the various actors and how they frame the discussion determine whether this initiative will provide meaningful information and democratic legitimacy

L’hésitation vaccinale en France: Prévalence et variation selon le statut socio-économique des parents

International audienceNo abstract availabl

Physicians’ decision processes about the HPV vaccine: A qualitative study

International audienceBackground: The contemporary crisis of trust in vaccines has severely impaired acceptance of the HPV vaccine, especially in France, where its uptake culminated at 23.7% in 2018 (complete course at age 16). Physicians’ recommendations strongly influence its acceptance/refusal. Our study sought to understand the decision processes leading physicians to recommend this vaccine (or not). Methods: Qualitative interviews of French physicians (general practitioners, gynecologists, and pediatricians). We first randomly selected doctors in a national register of medical professionals and then resorted to snowballing to build a convenience sample. We coded the interviews in a thematic analysis built both inductively and deductively from our research questions and data. Results: Two thirds of the participants (19/28) were favorable to HPV vaccination, some (4) opposed it, while the others were hesitant about recommending it. In explaining their opinions, most participants mentioned that they trusted the stakeholders within the vaccination system: the less trust they had, the more critical they were of the vaccine and the more importance they attributed to patients’ opinions. We identified three different ways they interacted with patients on this topic: informing and convincing; adapting to patients’ opinions; refusing compromise about vaccination. Crossing these various themes, we found 5 types of physicians: dissidents (mistrustful of the healthcare system and HPV vaccine), hesitant (finding it difficult to make up their minds about this vaccination), laissez-faire (letting patients decide by themselves, but very favorable to HPV vaccination), educator (very favorable), and uncompromising vaccinators (refusing debate). Pediatricians were overrepresented among the latter two types. Conclusions: Physicians’ judgment was influenced by their trust in the stakeholders involved in designing and implementing the HPV vaccination strategy. In this sense, doctors did not differ substantially from laypeople. They were, nonetheless, strongly influenced by their professional style and ethos. © 2020 Elsevier Lt

Attitudes about COVID-19 Lockdown among General Population, France, March 2020

International audienceBecause the effectiveness of a coronavirus disease lockdown in curbing coronavirus disease spread depends on public support, acquiring real-time information about the way populations reacted to the lockdown is crucial. In France, such public support remained fragile among low-income persons, probably because the lockdown exacerbated preexisting social inequalities and conflicts

The French general population's attitudes toward lockdown against COVID-19: a fragile consensus

International audienceBackground In March 2020, as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID- 19) pandemic was spreading across the globe, many countries have implemented unprecedented lockdown measures. But how populations did react to these measures? We examined the case of France. Our aims were threefold: assessing some aspects of their impact on French's daily living conditions; investigating their attitudes toward the lockdown; investigating the factors associated with these attitudes. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was carried out 10 days after the nationwide lockdown (from March 27th to March 29th 2020), among a representative sample of the mainland French population aged 18 and over. A quota sampling method was applied to achieve a sample of 1012 respondents. We used a cluster analysis to obtain contrasted attitudinal profiles, and logistic regressions to investigated which factors were associated to these profiles. Results After 10 days of lockdown, there were already significant consequences regarding respondents' living conditions and mental health. Most respondents supported the current lockdown. However, it appeared as a stopgap measure due to a lack of alternatives, and a large majority acknowledged its heavy drawbacks. We found three contrasted attitudinal profiles: full support (38%), strong but critical support (31%), limited support (31%). Regarding respondents' SES, low-income and low-education respondents were more likely to display critical or limited support to the lockdown, as well as those who reported deteriorated living conditions or psychological distress. Conclusions In France, the large public support to the lockdown was fragile. First, it was a critical consensus anchored in current controversies and recent social struggles. Second, it was weaker among people with a lows SES, especially since the lockdown have exacerbated preexisting social inequalities

The French general population's attitudes toward lockdown against COVID-19: a fragile consensus

International audienceIn March 2020, as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID- 19) pandemic was spreading across the globe, many countries have implemented unprecedented lockdown measures. But how populations did react to these measures? We examined the case of France. Our aims were threefold: assessing some aspects of their impact on French's daily living conditions; investigating their attitudes toward the lockdown; investigating the factors associated with these attitudes. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was carried out 10 days after the nationwide lockdown (from March 27th to March 29th 2020), among a representative sample of the mainland French population aged 18 and over. A quota sampling method was applied to achieve a sample of 1012 respondents. We used a cluster analysis to obtain contrasted attitudinal profiles, and logistic regressions to investigated which factors were associated to these profiles. Results After 10 days of lockdown, there were already significant consequences regarding respondents' living conditions and mental health. Most respondents supported the current lockdown. However, it appeared as a stopgap measure due to a lack of alternatives, and a large majority acknowledged its heavy drawbacks. We found three contrasted attitudinal profiles: full support (38%), strong but critical support (31%), limited support (31%). Regarding respondents' SES, low-income and low-education respondents were more likely to display critical or limited support to the lockdown, as well as those who reported deteriorated living conditions or psychological distress. Conclusions In France, the large public support to the lockdown was fragile. First, it was a critical consensus anchored in current controversies and recent social struggles. Second, it was weaker among people with a lows SES, especially since the lockdown have exacerbated preexisting social inequalities

Covid‐19 health crisis and lockdown associated with high level of sleep complaints and hypnotic uptake at the population level

International audienceThe Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted the habits of billions of people around the world. Lockdown at home is mandatory, forcing many families, each member with their own sleep–wake habits, to spend 24 hr a day together, continuously. Sleep is crucial for maintaining immune systems and contributes deeply to physical and psychological health. To assess sleep problems and use of sleeping pills, we conducted a cross-sectional study of a representative sample of the general population in France. The self-reported sleep complaint items, which covered the previous 8 days, have been used in the 2017 French Health Barometer Survey, a cross-sectional survey on various public health issues. After 2 weeks of confinement, 74% of the participants (1,005 subjects) reported trouble sleeping compared with a prevalence rate of 49% in the last general population survey. Women reported more sleeping problems than men, with greater frequency or severity: 31% vs. 16%. Unusually, young people (aged 18–34 years) reported sleep problems slightly more frequently than elderly people (79% vs. 72% among those aged 35 or older), with 60% of the younger group reporting that these problems increased with confinement (vs. 51% of their elders). Finally, 16% of participants reported they had taken sleeping pills during the last 12 months, and 41% of them reported using these drugs since the lockdown started. These results suggest that the COVID crisis is associated with severe sleep disorders among the French population, especially young people