Danyu Li, Wen Zhang, Jennifer Stinson, Lindsay Jibb, Tieghan Killackey, Nicole Pope, Fan Wu, Changrong Yuan
{"title":"Navigating HPV Vaccination: a Qualitative Study on Chinese Women's Decision-Making Experiences.","authors":"Danyu Li, Wen Zhang, Jennifer Stinson, Lindsay Jibb, Tieghan Killackey, Nicole Pope, Fan Wu, Changrong Yuan","doi":"10.1007/s13187-024-02555-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This qualitative study explores the decision experiences of adult women regarding HPV vaccination, highlighting their decision needs, outcomes, and expected support. A qualitative descriptive study design was used. A semi-structured interview guide based on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) was used to interview Chinese women (aged 18 to 45). These interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive content analysis. Sociodemographic data were tabulated using descriptive statistics. Fifteen participants were interviewed, and three categories were constructed. (1) Unmet decision needs: participants have inadequate knowledge, biased knowledge sources, inadequate resources, and unrealistic expectations. (2) Current decision outcomes: the quality of decisions varied among participants, with some feeling satisfied and well-informed, while others expressed dissatisfaction due to unclear information and a lack of understanding. Twelve participants who decided to vaccinate adhered to their choice, managing side effects as expected. Three participants who chose not to vaccinate remained unvaccinated. (3) Expected decision support: participants expressed a need for systematic; reliable information presented in a user-friendly manner; improved access to vaccination services; and emotional support from family, friends, and healthcare providers to support making their HPV vaccine decision. Women deciding on HPV vaccination are facing several decision needs that need to be addressed. Future support targeting women's decision-making experience could provide them with better information, resource access, and emotional support, and eventually improve vaccination uptake.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-024-02555-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This qualitative study explores the decision experiences of adult women regarding HPV vaccination, highlighting their decision needs, outcomes, and expected support. A qualitative descriptive study design was used. A semi-structured interview guide based on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) was used to interview Chinese women (aged 18 to 45). These interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive content analysis. Sociodemographic data were tabulated using descriptive statistics. Fifteen participants were interviewed, and three categories were constructed. (1) Unmet decision needs: participants have inadequate knowledge, biased knowledge sources, inadequate resources, and unrealistic expectations. (2) Current decision outcomes: the quality of decisions varied among participants, with some feeling satisfied and well-informed, while others expressed dissatisfaction due to unclear information and a lack of understanding. Twelve participants who decided to vaccinate adhered to their choice, managing side effects as expected. Three participants who chose not to vaccinate remained unvaccinated. (3) Expected decision support: participants expressed a need for systematic; reliable information presented in a user-friendly manner; improved access to vaccination services; and emotional support from family, friends, and healthcare providers to support making their HPV vaccine decision. Women deciding on HPV vaccination are facing several decision needs that need to be addressed. Future support targeting women's decision-making experience could provide them with better information, resource access, and emotional support, and eventually improve vaccination uptake.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues.
Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care.
We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts.
Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited.
Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants.
Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.