The effects of vaccine characteristics on adult women's attitudes about vaccination: a conjoint analysis study

Melissa S Stockwell1, Susan L Rosenthal, Lynne A Sturm

  • 1Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University, College of Physician and Surgeons, Morgan Stanley Children's Hospital at New York Presbyterian, New York, NY, United States. mstockwell@columbia.edu

Vaccine
|April 30, 2011
PubMed

The number of current and future vaccines for adults has been steadily increasing. Yet, vaccine coverage rates for adult vaccinations have historically been low, and less is known about how adults in the mid-adult age range make vaccine decisions for themselves. The purpose of this study was to assess which vaccine characteristics affect vaccine decision-making among mid-adult women. Adult women, aged 27-55 (n=258) rated 9 hypothetical vaccine scenarios, each of which was defined along 4 dimensions: mode of transmission (STI or non-STI), severity of infection (curable, chronic, or fatal), vaccine efficacy (50%, 70%, or 90%), and availability of behavioral methods for prevention (available or not available). Ratings ranged from 0 to 100. Conjoint analysis was used to assess the effect of relative preferences for the vaccine scenario characteristics on participant ratings of scenarios. The mean vaccine scenario rating was 78.2. Nearly half (40%, n=104) of participants rated all nine scenarios the same, with the majority of those (84%) holding strongly positive views. Conjoint analysis of the other 154 participants who discriminated between scenarios indicated that the main drivers for vaccine acceptability were severity of the disease and the efficacy of the vaccine to prevent the disease. Mode of transmission and availability of a preventative behavioral measure did not play a significant role. Future studies should further assess how women's understanding of severity of the disease and efficacy of the vaccine to prevent disease may be useful for increasing vaccine acceptability.

Related Concept Videos

Vaccinations01:51

Vaccinations

Overview
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Vaccines01:21

Vaccines

Vaccines are among the most effective tools in preventive medicine, designed to prepare the immune system to recognize and combat infectious agents. By introducing antigens—substances that the immune system identifies as foreign—vaccines stimulate an adaptive immune response that leads to immunological memory. This immunological memory enables the body to mount a faster and more effective response upon future exposures to the actual pathogen.Vaccines can be categorized based on the type of...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies01:27

Confounding in Epidemiological Studies

Confounding in statistical epidemiology represents a pivotal challenge, referring to the distortion in the perceived relationship between an exposure and an outcome due to the presence of a third variable, known as a confounder. This variable is associated with both the exposure and the outcome but is not a direct link in their causal chain. Its presence can lead to erroneous interpretations of the exposure's effect, either exaggerating or underestimating the true association. This phenomenon...