Rational and irrational vaccine hesitancy.

IF 3.5 4区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Manfred S Green
{"title":"Rational and irrational vaccine hesitancy.","authors":"Manfred S Green","doi":"10.1186/s13584-023-00560-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the paper published recently in this journal, Kumar et al. explained why the key to improved COVID-19 vaccine uptake is to understand societal reactions leading to vaccine hesitancy. They conclude that communications strategies should be tailored to the different phases of vaccine hesitancy. However, within the theoretical framework provided in their paper, vaccine hesitancy should be recognized as having both rational and irrational components. Rational vaccine hesitancy is a natural result of the inherent uncertainties in the potential impact of vaccines in controlling the pandemic. In general, irrational hesitancy is based on baseless information obtained from hearsay and deliberately false information. Risk communication should address both with transparent, evidence-based information. Rational concerns can be allayed by sharing the process in which dilemmas and uncertainties are dealt with by the health authorities. Messages on irrational concerns need to address head on the sources spreading unscientific and unsound information. In both cases, there is a need to develop risk communication that restores trust in the health authorities.</p>","PeriodicalId":46694,"journal":{"name":"Israel Journal of Health Policy Research","volume":"12 1","pages":"11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10043862/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Israel Journal of Health Policy Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-023-00560-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the paper published recently in this journal, Kumar et al. explained why the key to improved COVID-19 vaccine uptake is to understand societal reactions leading to vaccine hesitancy. They conclude that communications strategies should be tailored to the different phases of vaccine hesitancy. However, within the theoretical framework provided in their paper, vaccine hesitancy should be recognized as having both rational and irrational components. Rational vaccine hesitancy is a natural result of the inherent uncertainties in the potential impact of vaccines in controlling the pandemic. In general, irrational hesitancy is based on baseless information obtained from hearsay and deliberately false information. Risk communication should address both with transparent, evidence-based information. Rational concerns can be allayed by sharing the process in which dilemmas and uncertainties are dealt with by the health authorities. Messages on irrational concerns need to address head on the sources spreading unscientific and unsound information. In both cases, there is a need to develop risk communication that restores trust in the health authorities.

合理和不合理的疫苗犹豫。
在最近发表在该杂志上的论文中,Kumar等人解释了为什么改善COVID-19疫苗摄取的关键是了解导致疫苗犹豫的社会反应。他们的结论是,传播战略应该针对疫苗犹豫的不同阶段进行调整。然而,在他们的论文提供的理论框架内,应该认识到疫苗犹豫既有合理的成分,也有不合理的成分。合理的疫苗犹豫是疫苗在控制大流行方面潜在影响的固有不确定性的自然结果。一般来说,非理性犹豫是基于从道听途说中获得的毫无根据的信息和故意虚假的信息。风险沟通应通过透明的、基于证据的信息解决这两个问题。通过分享卫生当局处理困境和不确定性的过程,可以减轻合理的关切。有关非理性担忧的信息需要迎头解决传播不科学和不健全信息的来源。在这两种情况下,都需要开展风险沟通,以恢复对卫生当局的信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.40%
发文量
38
审稿时长
28 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信