Centre for Health Economics Research and Modeling Infectious Diseases, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Soc Sci Med. 2013 Jan;77:84-9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.11.009. Epub 2012 Nov 16.
Vaccination programs increasingly have to comply with standards of evidence-based decision making. However, such a framework tends to ignore social and ethical sensitivities, risking policy choices that lack crucial public support. Research is needed under which circumstances and to which extent equity and autonomy should prevail over effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in matters of infectious disease prevention. We report on a study investigating public preferences over various vaccination policy options, based on a population survey held in Flanders, Belgium (N = 1049) between March and July 2011. We found (1) that public support varied considerably between policies that were equally efficient in preventing disease but differed according to target group or incentives to improve uptake and (2) that preferences over the use of legal compulsion, financial accountability or the offering of rewards appear to be driven by individuals' social orientation.
疫苗接种计划越来越需要符合循证决策的标准。然而，这样的框架往往忽略了社会和伦理敏感性，有可能导致政策选择缺乏关键的公众支持。需要研究在何种情况下以及在何种程度上，在传染病预防方面，公平和自主权应该优先于效果和成本效益。我们报告了一项研究，该研究基于 2011 年 3 月至 7 月在比利时弗兰德斯进行的一项人口调查（N=1049），调查了公众对各种疫苗接种政策选择的偏好。我们发现：（1）在预防疾病同样有效的政策之间，公众支持存在很大差异，但政策根据目标群体或提高接种率的激励措施而有所不同；（2）对使用法律强制、财务问责制或提供奖励的偏好似乎是由个人的社会取向驱动的。
