Suppr超能文献

1995 年至 2020 年期间儿童疫苗接种政策的党派极化现象。

Partisan Polarization of Childhood Vaccination Policies, 1995‒2020.

机构信息

Kevin Estep is with the Department of Cultural and Social Studies, Health Administration and Policy Program, and the Department of Medical Humanities, Creighton University, Omaha, NE. Annika Muse is with the Department of Biology, Creighton University. Shannon Sweeney is with the Department of Cultural and Social Studies, Health Administration and Policy Program, Creighton University. Neal D. Goldstein is with the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA.

出版信息

Am J Public Health. 2022 Oct;112(10):1471-1479. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2022.306964. Epub 2022 Aug 25.

Abstract

To examine trends in partisan polarization of childhood vaccine bills and the impact of polarization on bill passage in the United States. We performed content analysis on 1497 US state bills (1995-2020) and obtained voting returns for 228 legislative votes (2011‒2020). We performed descriptive and statistical analyses using 2 measures of polarization. Vote polarization rose more rapidly for immunization than abortion or veterans' affairs bills. Bills in 2019-2020 were more than 7 times more likely to be polarized than in 1995-1996 (odds ratio [OR] = 7.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.54, 13.99). Bills related to public health emergencies were more polarized (OR = 1.76; 95% CI = 1.13, 2.75). Sponsor polarization was associated with 34% lower odds of passage (OR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.42, 1.03). State lawmakers were more divided on vaccine policy, but partisan bills were less likely to pass. Bill characteristics associated with lower polarization could signal opportunities for future bipartisanship. Increasing partisan polarization could alter state-level vaccine policies in ways that jeopardize childhood immunization rates or weaken responsiveness during public health emergencies. Authorities should look for areas of bipartisan agreement on how to maintain vaccination rates. (. 2022;112(10):1471-1479. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306964).

摘要

研究目的

考察美国儿童疫苗法案中党派极化的趋势,以及极化对法案通过的影响。

研究方法

我们对 1497 项美国州级法案(1995-2020 年)进行了内容分析,并获得了 228 项立法投票的投票结果(2011-2020 年)。我们使用两种极化衡量标准进行描述性和统计分析。

研究结果

与堕胎或退伍军人事务法案相比,免疫法案的投票极化上升得更快。2019-2020 年的法案比 1995-1996 年的法案更有可能出现极化(优势比 [OR] = 7.04;95%置信区间 [CI] = 3.54, 13.99)。与公共卫生紧急情况相关的法案更为极化(OR = 1.76;95%CI = 1.13, 2.75)。提案人的极化程度与通过的可能性降低 34%相关(OR = 0.66;95%CI = 0.42, 1.03)。

结论

州议员在疫苗政策上的分歧更大,但党派法案更不可能通过。与低极化相关的法案特征可能预示着未来两党合作的机会。党派极化的加剧可能会以危及儿童免疫接种率或削弱公共卫生紧急情况下的响应能力的方式改变州一级的疫苗政策。当局应该寻找在如何维持疫苗接种率方面达成两党共识的领域。

相似文献

1
Partisan Polarization of Childhood Vaccination Policies, 1995‒2020.1995 年至 2020 年期间儿童疫苗接种政策的党派极化现象。
Am J Public Health. 2022 Oct;112(10):1471-1479. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2022.306964. Epub 2022 Aug 25.
9
Policy Views and Negative Beliefs About Vaccines in the United States, 2019.2019 年美国关于疫苗的政策观点和负面信念。
Am J Public Health. 2020 Oct;110(10):1561-1563. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2020.305828. Epub 2020 Aug 20.

引用本文的文献

5
Political network composition predicts vaccination attitudes.政治网络构成预测疫苗接种态度。
Soc Sci Med. 2023 Jul;328:116004. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116004. Epub 2023 Jun 2.
6
Towards Eliminating Nonmedical Vaccination Exemptions Among School-Age Children.朝着消除学龄儿童非医学疫苗豁免的目标迈进。
Dela J Public Health. 2022 Mar 29;8(1):84-88. doi: 10.32481/djph.2022.03.014. eCollection 2022 Mar.

本文引用的文献

6
The History of the Personal Belief Exemption.个人信仰豁免的历史。
Pediatrics. 2020 Apr;145(4). doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-2551. Epub 2020 Mar 17.
9

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验