Keselman Alla, Zeyer Albert
Office of Engagement and Training, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20894, USA.
Institute for Education in Science and Social Studies, University of Education Lucerne, 6003 Lucerne, Switzerland.
Vaccines (Basel). 2022 Jan 23;10(2):175. doi: 10.3390/vaccines10020175.
Not much is known about the role of scientific knowledge in vaccination decision making. This study is based on previous findings that the concern about the human papillomavirus (HPV) agent mutating back to a virulent HPV was common among Swiss student teachers and turned out to be one factor of vaccine hesitancy. The study investigate the impact of a standard public health brochure describing the effectiveness, safety, and importance of HPV vaccination on young student teachers, and the additional effect of supplementing the standard brochure with biological arguments against the mutation concerns. It uses a pre-posttest design and assigns participants randomly to two groups, one reviewing a standard public health brochure, the other the same brochure enhanced with additional biological information. Participants in both groups showed a significant positive change in their beliefs about vaccination safety, effectiveness, and importance in preventing cervical cancer. Post hoc analysis showed significant safety beliefs gain for the subgroup of participants who received the biology-enhanced text and held moderate, rather than high or low, pretest safety beliefs-the so-called fencesitters. We conclude that these fencesitters may particularly profit from even minimal (biologically supplemented) interventions, an effect that should receive more attention in future research.
关于科学知识在疫苗接种决策中的作用,人们了解得并不多。本研究基于先前的研究结果,即瑞士实习教师普遍担心人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)会逆转为毒性更强的HPV,而这一担忧被证明是疫苗犹豫的一个因素。该研究调查了一份描述HPV疫苗接种的有效性、安全性和重要性的标准公共卫生宣传册对年轻实习教师的影响,以及用针对变异担忧的生物学论据补充标准宣传册的额外效果。研究采用前后测试设计,并将参与者随机分为两组,一组阅读标准公共卫生宣传册,另一组阅读补充了额外生物学信息的相同宣传册。两组参与者在对疫苗接种安全性、有效性以及预防宫颈癌重要性的信念上均出现了显著的积极变化。事后分析表明,对于那些在预测试中持有中等而非高或低安全性信念的参与者亚组(即所谓的骑墙派),他们在安全性信念方面有显著提升,这些参与者阅读了补充生物学内容的文本。我们得出结论,这些骑墙派可能尤其会从哪怕是最少量(补充生物学内容)的干预措施中获益,这一效应在未来研究中应得到更多关注。