Centre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 1;13(8):e0201145. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201145. eCollection 2018.
Communication interventions are widely used to promote childhood vaccination and sustain vaccine acceptance, but communication's role in changing people's beliefs and behaviours is not well understood. To determine why these interventions work or where they fail, evaluations must measure a range of outcomes in addition to vaccination uptake. As part of a larger project to develop a preliminary Core Outcome Set for vaccination communication, we conducted a qualitative focus group study exploring how parents and health professionals perceive and experience communication encounters and what outcomes are relevant to them.
Focus group participants included parents and health professionals involved in vaccination communication (healthcare providers, researchers and policymakers). Participants discussed their experiences with communication for childhood vaccination, and what made the communication 'successful' or 'unsuccessful.' Our analysis involved two stages: first, we thematically analysed the discussions, identifying key parent and professional themes. In stage two, we used an interpretive analysis approach to translate the themes and quotes into measurable outcomes. We compared these outcomes with outcomes measured in vaccination communication trials (previously identified and mapped).
We held three focus groups with parents (n = 12) and four with professionals (n = 19). In stage one, we identified six parent themes (primarily related to decision-making) and five professional themes (primarily related to intervention planning, delivery and evaluation). In stage two, we translated 47 outcomes from parents and 73 from professionals (91 total, de-duplicated). All stakeholders discussed attitudes or beliefs and decision-making outcomes most frequently. Most (66%) of the focus group-generated outcomes were not measured in vaccination communication trials.
Consulting with stakeholders through focus groups allowed us to explore how parents and professionals experienced vaccination communication, identify those aspects of the experience that were important to them, and translate these into outcomes that can be prioritised into a Core Outcome Set and measured in intervention evaluations.
沟通干预措施被广泛用于促进儿童疫苗接种和维持疫苗接种的接受度，但沟通在改变人们的信念和行为方面的作用尚未得到很好的理解。为了确定这些干预措施为何有效或为何失败，评估必须除了接种率外，还衡量一系列结果。作为制定疫苗接种沟通初步核心结局集的更大项目的一部分，我们进行了一项定性焦点小组研究，探讨了父母和卫生专业人员如何感知和体验沟通接触，以及哪些结果与他们相关。
焦点小组参与者包括参与疫苗接种沟通的父母和卫生专业人员（医疗保健提供者、研究人员和政策制定者）。参与者讨论了他们在儿童疫苗接种沟通方面的经验，以及是什么使沟通“成功”或“不成功”。我们的分析包括两个阶段：首先，我们对讨论进行了主题分析，确定了关键的家长和专业主题。在第二阶段，我们使用解释性分析方法将主题和引语转化为可衡量的结果。我们将这些结果与疫苗接种沟通试验中测量的结果（之前确定和映射的）进行了比较。
我们与父母（n=12）进行了三次焦点小组讨论，与专业人员（n=19）进行了四次讨论。在第一阶段，我们确定了六个家长主题（主要与决策有关）和五个专业主题（主要与干预计划、交付和评估有关）。在第二阶段，我们从父母那里翻译了 47 个结果，从专业人员那里翻译了 73 个结果（共 91 个，去重）。所有利益相关者最常讨论态度或信念和决策结果。焦点小组生成的结果中，大多数（66%）未在疫苗接种沟通试验中测量。
通过焦点小组与利益相关者协商，使我们能够探讨父母和专业人员如何体验疫苗接种沟通，确定他们认为重要的体验方面，并将这些方面转化为可以优先纳入核心结局集并在干预评估中测量的结果。
