Vaccine eagerness: A new framework to analyse preferences in single profile discrete choice experiments. Application to HPV vaccination decisions among French adolescents

Chyderiotis, Sandra; Sicsic, Jonathan; Thilly, Nathalie; Mueller, Judith E.; Bonnay, Stéphanie; Pulcini, Céline; Agrinier, Nelly; Estelle, F.; Gilberg, Serge; Bruel, Sébastien; Josselin, Le Bel; Rossignol, Louise; Ecollan, Marie; Pinot, Juliette; Arthur, Tron; Dragos-Paul, Hagiu; Minghui, Zuo; Gauchet, Aurélie; Julie, Bros; Catherine, Juneau; Gaëlle, Vareilles; Épaulard, Olivier; Anne-Sophie, Banaszuk; Marion, Branchereau; Gagneux‐Brunon, Amandine; Kalecinski, J.; Jeanleboeuf, Florian; Géraldine, Jambon; Elisabeth, Botelho-Nevers; Lasset, Christine; Asse, Laetitia Marie Dit; Chevreul, K.; Michel, Morgane; Raude, Jocelyn; Anne-Sophie, Barret; Bonmarin, Isabelle; Lévy-Brühl, Daniel; Giraudeau, Bruno

doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2022.101058

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, awareness that influenza is a serious illness (ruling out complacency) and the desire not to transmit influenza to family members and friends (promoting collective responsibility) seem to facilitate adherence. 15 While discussing the risk/benefit ratio of a vaccine can be counter-productive, 16 an intervention based on motivational interviewing increases mothers’ intention to vaccinate their child at the age of 2 months. 17 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived impact of discussions with a healthcare professional on patients’ decision regarding COVID-19 vaccine

Charmasson,

Ecollan,

Jaury

et al. 2024

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is evidence that advice from Healthcare Professionals (HCPs) plays an important role in patients’ decision to get vaccinated, but the extent to which patients perceive this impact is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the perceived impact of a discussion with a HCP on participants’ decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among adults who consulted a general practitioner (GP) or a pharmacist in Ile-de-France, France, after COVID-19 vaccines became available (October-November 2021 period). A total of 344 participants were included, 65.2% of whom reported having had a discussion about COVID-19 vaccines with a HCP. Overall, 55% of participants were advised to be vaccinated by their HCP. Most of the discussions took place with a GP ( n = 203, 48.9%). According to 52.5% of participants, the discussion had a positive impact, i.e. it was perceived as encouraging vaccination. The latter reported that, among HCPs, GPs had the greatest number of discussions with a positive impact on the decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19 (93.1%). In the study population, the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy rate, according to the WHO definition, was high (38.1%), although the COVID-19 vaccine coverage rate was 87.1%. Vaccine hesitant participants were more likely to report a discussion that had a perceived negative impact on their decision to get vaccinated (20.0%) than non-hesitant participants (5.8%, p = .004).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived impact of discussions with a healthcare professional on patients’ decision regarding COVID-19 vaccine

Charmasson,

Ecollan,

Jaury

et al. 2024

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To sum up, vaccine uptake was in this context driven by an immediate benefit; escaping economic and social restrictions; which strongly incentivized impatient people who were a priori the more reluctant to get vaccinated. In other words, the vaccine-pass created a context of vaccination eagerness for impatient individuals, i.e., the wish to get vaccinated as soon as possible, which was already described for other infectious diseases like monkeypox (Gagneux-Brunon, Dauby, Launay, & Botelho-Nevers, 2022) or HPV (Chyderiotis et al, 2022).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Consumer Impatience: A Key Motive for Covid-19 Vaccination

Guillon

Nguyen-Van

Willinger

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…20 First, published evidence on facilitators and barriers to the uptake of HPV vaccination, and on existing interventions to improve vaccination in general and for HPV in particular among adolescents helped identify the framework of a 3-component intervention: (1) educating and motivating adolescents in middle schools; (2) training general practitioners (GPs) on up-to-date HPV information and motivational interviewing techniques; and (3) free HPV vaccination at school. A diagnostic phase was then carried out to identify-among others-knowledge, beliefs, barriers, and preferences around HPV vaccination and the sociodemographic factors associated with each, [21][22][23][24] to define the exact content of each component to appropriately address vaccine hesitancy in our population. The final version of the PrevHPV multicomponent intervention was constructed with the target populations to fit to all French adolescents, regardless of their sociodemographic characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of a School- and Primary Care–Based HPV Vaccination Intervention

Thilly,

Michel,

Simon

et al. 2024

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceThe human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is safe and effective, yet vaccination coverage remains below public health objectives in many countries.ObjectiveTo examine the effectiveness of a 3-component intervention on HPV vaccination coverage among adolescents aged 11 to 14 years 2 months after the intervention ended, each component being applied alone or in combination.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA cluster randomized trial with incomplete factorial design (PrevHPV) was conducted between July 1, 2021, and April 30, 2022, in French municipalities receiving 0, 1, 2, or 3 components of the intervention. Randomization was stratified by school district and municipalities’ socioeconomic level. Analyses were carried out on 11- to 14-year-old adolescents living in all participating municipalities, regardless of what had been implemented.InterventionThe PrevHPV intervention had 3 components: (1) educating and motivating 11- to 14-year-old adolescents in middle schools, along with their parents; (2) training general practitioners (GPs) on up-to-date HPV information and motivational interviewing techniques; and (3) free HPV vaccination at school.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was HPV vaccination coverage (≥1 dose) 2 months after the intervention ended among 11- to 14-year-old adolescents living in participating municipalities, based on the French national reimbursement database and data collected during the trial in groups randomized to implement at-school vaccination.ResultsA total of 91 municipalities comprising 30 739 adolescents aged 11 to 14 years (15 876 boys and 14 863 girls) were included and analyzed. Half the municipalities were in the 2 lowest socioeconomic quintiles and access to GPs was poor in more than two-thirds of the municipalities. Thirty-eight of 61 schools (62.3%) implemented actions and 26 of 45 municipalities (57.8%) had at least 1 trained GP. The median vaccination coverage increased by 4.0 percentage points (IQR, 2.0-7.3 percentage points) to 14.2 percentage points (IQR, 9.1-17.3 percentage points) at 2 months. At-school vaccination significantly increased vaccination coverage (5.50 percentage points [95% CI, 3.13-7.88 percentage points]) while no effect was observed for adolescents’ education and motivation (−0.08 percentage points [95% CI, −2.54 to 2.39 percentage points]) and GPs’ training (−1.46 percentage points [95% CI, −3.44 to 0.53 percentage points]). Subgroup analyses found a significant interaction between at-school vaccination and access to GPs, with a higher effect when access was poor (8.62 percentage points [95% CI, 5.37-11.86 percentage points] vs 2.13 percentage points [95% CI, −1.25 to 5.50 percentage points]; P = .007 for interaction).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cluster randomized trial, within the context of the late COVID-19 pandemic period and limited school and GP participation, at-school HPV vaccination significantly increased vaccination coverage. The trial did not show a significant effect for training GPs and education and motivation, although it may be observed after more time has elapsed after the intervention.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04945655

show abstract

Vaccine eagerness: A new framework to analyse preferences in single profile discrete choice experiments. Application to HPV vaccination decisions among French adolescents

Cited by 7 publications

References 21 publications

Perceived impact of discussions with a healthcare professional on patients’ decision regarding COVID-19 vaccine

Perceived impact of discussions with a healthcare professional on patients’ decision regarding COVID-19 vaccine

Consumer Impatience: A Key Motive for Covid-19 Vaccination

Effectiveness of a School- and Primary Care–Based HPV Vaccination Intervention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About