Who chooses alternative sources of information about childhood vaccinations? A cross-sectional study

Introduction: Vaccine hesitancy can lead to problematic outcomes in terms of public health. A factor playing a fundamental role in this dynamic is the source of information considered by parents in the decision-making progress that leads to the acceptance or refusal of childhood vaccinations. This study aims to investigate the sources of information considered by the parents of children attending primary and secondary schools in two large Italian cities and to identify predictors that led to choosing alternative sources of information. Methods: An online questionnaire was administered to the parents of students attending elementary, middle, and high schools in Rome and Turin. Two validated tools were used: the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines Survey and the Vaccine Health Literacy of adults in Italian. Sources of information about vaccinations, trust toward the healthcare system, hesitancy and attitudes about COVID-19 vaccinations, were also investigated. A multivariable logistic regression model was built to identify predictors of the preferred sources of information on the topic. Results: Totally, 2,301 answers to the survey were collected from June to October 2021. Of these, 1,127 came from parents in Rome (49%) and 1,174 from parents based in Turin (51%) with a mean age of 47.7 years (±6.4). The majority of the respondents were mothers (81%), married (73%), with two or more children (70.5%). The multivariable logistic regression model results showed that fathers were more inclined than mothers to use alternative sources of information (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.29–2.00). Moreover, a higher level of vaccine hesitancy was a strong predictor for choosing alternative sources of information (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.73–3.46). The HLVa-it scores show that parents with a lower Vaccine Literacy (VL) were more inclined to use alternative sources of information. Discussion: Addressing health literacy issues and changing the official forms of communication could help improving vaccine acceptance. This study shows the importance of rebuilding a trusting relationship between patients and health care providers, which is fundamental in the fight against vaccine hesitancy

Assessment of transparency indicators in space medicine.

Space medicine is a vital discipline with often time-intensive and costly projects and constrained opportunities for studying various elements such as space missions, astronauts, and simulated environments. Moreover, private interests gain increasing influence in this discipline. In scientific disciplines with these features, transparent and rigorous methods are essential. Here, we undertook an evaluation of transparency indicators in publications within the field of space medicine. A meta-epidemiological assessment of PubMed Central Open Access (PMC OA) eligible articles within the field of space medicine was performed for prevalence of code sharing, data sharing, pre-registration, conflicts of interest, and funding. Text mining was performed with the rtransparent text mining algorithms with manual validation of 200 random articles to obtain corrected estimates. Across 1215 included articles, 39 (3%) shared code, 258 (21%) shared data, 10 (1%) were registered, 110 (90%) contained a conflict-of-interest statement, and 1141 (93%) included a funding statement. After manual validation, the corrected estimates for code sharing, data sharing, and registration were 5%, 27%, and 1%, respectively. Data sharing was 32% when limited to original articles and highest in space/parabolic flights (46%). Overall, across space medicine we observed modest rates of data sharing, rare sharing of code and almost non-existent protocol registration. Enhancing transparency in space medicine research is imperative for safeguarding its scientific rigor and reproducibility

Categorical characteristics of studies evaluated manually and their relationship with transparency indicators.

Categorical characteristics of studies evaluated manually and their relationship with transparency indicators.</p

Continuous characteristics of studies evaluated manually and their relationship with transparency indicators.

Continuous characteristics of studies evaluated manually and their relationship with transparency indicators.</p

Evolution of transparency indicators over time.

Only the last decade (2013–2022) is shown, since there were few eligible articles before 2013 and confidence intervals for these earlier years are very wide. * Denotes a statistically significant time trend at p<0.005.</p

Study selection flowchart.

Space medicine is a vital discipline with often time-intensive and costly projects and constrained opportunities for studying various elements such as space missions, astronauts, and simulated environments. Moreover, private interests gain increasing influence in this discipline. In scientific disciplines with these features, transparent and rigorous methods are essential. Here, we undertook an evaluation of transparency indicators in publications within the field of space medicine. A meta-epidemiological assessment of PubMed Central Open Access (PMC OA) eligible articles within the field of space medicine was performed for prevalence of code sharing, data sharing, pre-registration, conflicts of interest, and funding. Text mining was performed with the rtransparent text mining algorithms with manual validation of 200 random articles to obtain corrected estimates. Across 1215 included articles, 39 (3%) shared code, 258 (21%) shared data, 10 (1%) were registered, 110 (90%) contained a conflict-of-interest statement, and 1141 (93%) included a funding statement. After manual validation, the corrected estimates for code sharing, data sharing, and registration were 5%, 27%, and 1%, respectively. Data sharing was 32% when limited to original articles and highest in space/parabolic flights (46%). Overall, across space medicine we observed modest rates of data sharing, rare sharing of code and almost non-existent protocol registration. Enhancing transparency in space medicine research is imperative for safeguarding its scientific rigor and reproducibility.</div

Vaccine literacy e attitudini vaccinali dei Genitori degli Studenti di una Asl di Roma. Risultati preliminari di uno Studio Cross-Sectional

In Europa solo l’85% dei cittadini ritiene che i vaccini siano efficaci (78% in Italia) e quasi la metà della popolazio ne ha paura degli effetti indesiderati gravi (48% Europa vs. 46% Italia). Queste convinzioni alimentano quella che l’OMS definisce “esitazione al vaccino”, ovvero il ritardo nell’accettazione o il totale rifiuto dei vaccini. Lo studio si propone di valutare in un campione di genitori di studenti di una ASL di Roma: i) il livello di esitazione vaccinale nei confronti delle vaccinazioni dei figli; ii) il livello di esitazione nei confronti dei vaccini anti COVID-19; iii) il livello di alfabetizzazione vaccinale dei genitori. Un questionario è stato somministrato on-line in modalità anonima ai genitori degli studenti tramite il registro elettronico delle scuole di appartenenza. Sono stati utilizzati due strumenti validati: il Parent Attitudes about Chil dhood Vaccines Survey (PACVs), e lo Health Literacy Vaccinale degli adulti in italiano (HLVa-IT). In una terza sezione è stata valutata l’esitazione vaccinale relativamente al COVID-19. Due modelli di regressione logistica multipla sono stati costruiti per identificare i predittori dell’esitazione vaccinale e del rifiuto del vaccino anti COVID-19. Tra giugno e settembre 2021 sono state raccolte 1005 risposte. In 818 di essi (81,4%), la compilazione è stata effettuata dalle madri degli studenti. I rispondenti affermano di essere coniugati e di essere occupati nell’83,4% e nell’88,4% dei casi, rispettivamente. L’età media è di 49,8 (±5,9) anni per i genitori e 14,3 (±3,2) per gli studenti. Globalmente, l’8,5% dei genitori ha dichiarato di essere assolutamente contrario alla vaccinazione anti-COVID19 per i propri figli, mentre il 5,9% rifiuta in maniera categorica la vaccinazione per sé stesso. La prevalenza di esitanti vaccinali nel campione indagato è pari a 9,7% (score PACVs≥50). I risultati della regressione logistica multivariata mostrano una associazione statisticamente significativa tra l’esitazione vaccinale e il basso livello di alfabetizza zione vaccinale sia funzionale (OR=0,58; IC 95%=0,39-0,88) sia interattiva/critica (OR 0,50; IC 95% 0,26 – 0,94), mentre il rifiuto del vaccino anti COVID-19 per sé stessi è fortemente associato all’esitazione vaccinale (OR 3,6; IC 95% 1,18 – 10,90). L’alfabetizzazione vaccinale è un forte predittore dell’esitazione vaccinale dei genitori; questa a sua volta è as sociata al rifiuto del vaccino anti COVID-19 da parte dei genitori per sé stessi. Il miglioramento dell’educazione sanitaria in ambito vaccinale deve essere costantemente perseguito per ridurre gli ostacoli alla vaccinazion