Predicting parents' decisions on MMR immunisation: a mixed method investigation

doi:10.1093/fampra/cmi066

Family Practice Advance Access originally published online on July 15, 2005
Family Practice 2005 22(6):658-662; doi:10.1093/fampra/cmi066

This Article

	Full Text
	FREE Full Text (PDF)
	All Versions of this Article: 22/6/658 most recent cmi066v1
	E-letters: Submit a response
	E-letters: View responses
	Alert me when this article is cited
	Alert me when E-letters are posted
	Alert me if a correction is posted

Services

	Email this article to a friend
	Similar articles in this journal
	Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
	Similar articles in PubMed
	Alert me to new issues of the journal
	Add to My Personal Archive
	Download to citation manager
	Search for citing articles in: ISI Web of Science (2)
	Request Permissions

Google Scholar

	Articles by Gellatly, J.
	Articles by Tiliopoulos, N.
	Search for Related Content

PubMed

	PubMed Citation
	Articles by Gellatly, J.
	Articles by Tiliopoulos, N.

Social Bookmarking

	What's this?

Predicting parents' decisions on MMR immunisation: a mixed method investigation

Judith Gellatly^a, Chris McVittie^b and Niko Tiliopoulos^b

^a School of Nursing, University of Manchester and ^b School of Social Sciences, Media & Communication, Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh, UK.

Correspondence to Dr Chris McVittie, School of Social Sciences, Media & Communication, Queen Margaret University College, Clerwood Terrace, Edinburgh EH12 8TS; Email: cmcvittie{at}qmuc.ac.uk

Background. Increasing uptake rates for MMR vaccination requiresan understanding of factors leading parents to decide for andagainst vaccination, particularly in the light of recent developments.

Objective. We investigated factors relevant to immunising andnon-immunising parents and the extent to which these factorspredicted their decisions.

Methods. The study was conducted in Edinburgh, UK. A two-stagemixed method design was used. Delphi technique elicited parents'views of factors relevant to MMR immunisation. Twenty-six factorsidentified as relevant were incorporated into a final questionnaire.Using cluster sampling, the final questionnaire was distributedto parents recruited through a group of local nurseries. 110parents participated: eighty (72.7%) had had their child MMRvaccinated, thirty (27.3%) had refused the vaccine. The factorsin the final questionnaire were analysed against vaccinationstatus using a direct binary logistic regression model.

Results. Four factors significantly predicted vaccination status,(prediction toward ‘yes vaccination’). These werethe influence of current research (OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.07–0.51),the helpfulness of leaflets and information packs (OR = 3.27,95% CI = 1.38–7.75), the importance of eradication ofrubella (OR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.01–5.78), and the importanceattached to the risk of adverse reactions (OR = 0.65, 95% CI= 0.48–0.87).

Conclusions. Differences between immunising and non-immunisingparents lie in the importance attached to four relevant factors.Excluding risk of adverse reactions, these factors have notbeen previously identified as salient and require to be exploredfurther. Health advice to parents should highlight the identifiedimportance attached to eradicating rubella and explicitly reflectresearch findings.

Keywords. Attitudes, immunization, MMR vaccine, parents.

Add to CiteULike CiteULike Add to Connotea Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

B. Delaney
Family Practice and the new era of electronic publishing
Fam. Pract., December 1, 2005; 22(6): 581 - 582.
[Full Text] [PDF]

E-letters:

Read all E-letters

Good enough reasons?: Alan Challoner; Family Practice, 28 Nov 2005 [Full text]