Parental attitudes towards mandatory vaccination; a systematic review

Smith, Louise; Hodson, Ava; Rubin, G. James

doi:10.1101/2021.02.24.21250288

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the types of intervention that were the focus of 1 A recent systematic review of mandatory vaccination for children recently summarized findings as follows: 'Quantitative studies found little evidence for any factors being consistently associated with support for mandatory vaccination. Qualitative studies found that parents perceived mandatory vaccination schemes as an infringement of their rights and that they preferred universal, compared to targeted, schemes' [22] studies, 2 concerned test-negative result for current infectiousness, 14 concerned test-positive for antibodies conferring natural immunity, and 17 concerned vaccination(s) conferring immunity. The majority of studies related to Covid-19, with one concerning yellow fever, and one other concerning flu vaccinations.…”

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural responses to Covid-19 health certification: a rapid review

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Covid-status certification – certificates for those who test negative for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, test positive for antibodies, or who have been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 – has been proposed to enable safer access to a range of activities. Realising these benefits will depend in part upon the behavioural and social impacts of certification. The aim of this rapid review was to describe public attitudes towards certification, and its possible impact on uptake of testing and vaccination, protective behaviours, and crime. Method A search was undertaken in peer-reviewed databases, pre-print databases, and the grey literature, from 2000 to December 2020. Studies were included if they measured attitudes towards or behavioural consequences of health certificates based on one of three indices of Covid-19 status: test-negative result for current infectiousness, test-positive for antibodies conferring natural immunity, or vaccination(s) conferring immunity. Results Thirty-three papers met the inclusion criteria, only three of which were rated as low risk of bias. Public attitudes were generally favourable towards the use of immunity certificates for international travel, but unfavourable towards their use for access to work and other activities. A significant minority was strongly opposed to the use of certificates of immunity for any purpose. The limited evidence suggested that intention to get vaccinated varied with the activity enabled by certification or vaccination (e.g., international travel). Where vaccination is seen as compulsory this could lead to unwillingness to accept a subsequent vaccination. There was some evidence that restricting access to settings and activities to those with antibody test certificates may lead to deliberate exposure to infection in a minority. Behaviours that reduce transmission may decrease upon health certificates based on any of the three indices of Covid-19 status, including physical distancing and handwashing. Conclusions The limited evidence suggests that health certification in relation to COVID-19 – outside of the context of international travel – has the potential for harm as well as benefit. Realising the benefits while minimising the harms will require real-time evaluations allowing modifications to maximise the potential contribution of certification to enable safer access to a range of activities.

show abstract

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural responses to Covid-19 health certification: a rapid review

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…'Quantitative studies found little evidence for any factors being consistently associated with support for mandatory vaccination. Qualitative studies found that parents perceived mandatory vaccination schemes as an infringement of their rights and that they preferred universal, compared to targeted, schemes' [23] . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.…”

Section: Inclusion and Exclusion Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…'Quantitative studies found little evidence for any factors being consistently associated with support for mandatory vaccination. Qualitative studies found that parents perceived mandatory vaccination schemes as an infringement of their rights and that they preferred universal, compared to targeted, schemes' [23] disease. We also included studies of public views of mandatory vaccination given that mandation can only be enforced with some kind of check -i.e.…”

Section: Inclusion and Exclusion Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural responses to Covid-19 health certification: A rapid review

Drury

Mao

John

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Covid-status certification (certificates for those who test negative for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, test positive for antibodies, or who have been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2) has been proposed to enable safer access to a range of activities. Realising these benefits will depend in part upon the behavioural and social impacts of certification. The aim of this rapid review was to describe public attitudes towards certification, and its possible impact on uptake of testing and vaccination, protective behaviours, and crime. Method A search was undertaken in peer-reviewed databases, pre-print databases, and the grey literature, from 2000 to December 2020. Studies were included if they measured attitudes towards or behavioural consequences of health certificates based on one of three indices of Covid-19 status: test-negative result for current infectiousness, test-positive for antibodies conferring natural immunity, or vaccination(s) conferring immunity. Results Thirty-three papers met the inclusion criteria, only three of which were rated as low risk of bias. Public attitudes were generally favourable towards the use of immunity certificates for international travel, but unfavourable towards their use for access to work and other activities. A significant minority was strongly opposed to the use of certificates of immunity for any purpose. The limited evidence suggested that intention to get vaccinated varied with the activity enabled by certification or vaccination (e.g., international travel). Where vaccination is seen as compulsory this could lead to unwillingness to accept a subsequent vaccination. There was some evidence that restricting access to settings and activities to those with antibody test certificates may lead to deliberate exposure to infection in a minority. Behaviours that reduce transmission may decrease upon health certificates based on any of the three indices of Covid-19 status, including physical distancing and handwashing. Conclusions The limited evidence suggests that health certification in relation to COVID-19 (outside of the context of international travel) has the potential for harm as well as benefit. Realising the benefits while minimising the harms will require real-time evaluations allowing modifications to maximise the potential contribution of certification to enable safer access to a range of activities.

show abstract

Parental attitudes towards mandatory vaccination; a systematic review

Cited by 2 publications

References 41 publications

Behavioural responses to Covid-19 health certification: a rapid review

Behavioural responses to Covid-19 health certification: a rapid review

Behavioural responses to Covid-19 health certification: A rapid review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About