社区疫苗犹豫的鉴定:一项描述性横断面研究。

Deniz S Yorulmaz Demir
{"title":"社区疫苗犹豫的鉴定:一项描述性横断面研究。","authors":"Deniz S Yorulmaz Demir","doi":"10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2025.66.1.3234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vaccine hesitancy has become one of the ten global health challenges to be addressed, given its increasing global prevalence.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to identify community vaccine hesitancy and the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy in a provincial center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This descriptive cross-sectional research was conducted with 215 adults seeking care at a family health center for any reason. The data collection instruments included the Descriptive Characteristics Questionnaire and the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale. Determinants of vaccine hesitancy were examined through multiple regression analysis (enter model). The STROBE (cross-sectional research model) guidelines were employed for reporting research data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among participants, 35.3% had a bachelor's degree or higher, 62.3% were employed, and 76.7% had children. 71.2% of the participants had not received education about vaccines, with only 45.6% considering all vaccines necessary and beneficial. Additionally, 16.2% of the participants with children were identified as having under-vaccinated children. Belief in the necessity and benefits of all vaccines (ß = -0.245, 95% CI: -4.715 to -1.453), belief in making vaccination mandatory (ß = -0.137, 95% CI: -4.873 to -0.083), receiving the COVID-19 vaccine (ß = -0.169, 95% CI: -5.925 to -0.947), and receiving the flu vaccine (ß = -0.158, 95% CI: -3.828 to -0.429) were determined to be protective against vaccine hesitancy. These variables explained 24.3% of vaccine hesitancy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The assessment revealed that the community exhibited moderate vaccine hesitancy and did not perceive all vaccines as necessary and beneficial. Considering the impact of vaccines on preventing infectious diseases, reducing disabilities, and preventing deaths, it is recommended to provide information about the seriousness of the diseases prevented by vaccines and the importance of vaccines.</p>","PeriodicalId":94106,"journal":{"name":"Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene","volume":"66 1","pages":"E31-E37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312717/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identification of Community Vaccine Hesitancy: A Descriptive-Cross-Sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Deniz S Yorulmaz Demir\",\"doi\":\"10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2025.66.1.3234\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vaccine hesitancy has become one of the ten global health challenges to be addressed, given its increasing global prevalence.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to identify community vaccine hesitancy and the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy in a provincial center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This descriptive cross-sectional research was conducted with 215 adults seeking care at a family health center for any reason. The data collection instruments included the Descriptive Characteristics Questionnaire and the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale. Determinants of vaccine hesitancy were examined through multiple regression analysis (enter model). The STROBE (cross-sectional research model) guidelines were employed for reporting research data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among participants, 35.3% had a bachelor's degree or higher, 62.3% were employed, and 76.7% had children. 71.2% of the participants had not received education about vaccines, with only 45.6% considering all vaccines necessary and beneficial. Additionally, 16.2% of the participants with children were identified as having under-vaccinated children. Belief in the necessity and benefits of all vaccines (ß = -0.245, 95% CI: -4.715 to -1.453), belief in making vaccination mandatory (ß = -0.137, 95% CI: -4.873 to -0.083), receiving the COVID-19 vaccine (ß = -0.169, 95% CI: -5.925 to -0.947), and receiving the flu vaccine (ß = -0.158, 95% CI: -3.828 to -0.429) were determined to be protective against vaccine hesitancy. These variables explained 24.3% of vaccine hesitancy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The assessment revealed that the community exhibited moderate vaccine hesitancy and did not perceive all vaccines as necessary and beneficial. Considering the impact of vaccines on preventing infectious diseases, reducing disabilities, and preventing deaths, it is recommended to provide information about the seriousness of the diseases prevented by vaccines and the importance of vaccines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94106,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene\",\"volume\":\"66 1\",\"pages\":\"E31-E37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312717/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2025.66.1.3234\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2025.66.1.3234","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:鉴于疫苗犹豫症在全球日益流行,它已成为需要解决的十大全球卫生挑战之一。目的:了解某省级中心社区疫苗犹豫状况及影响因素。方法:这项描述性横断面研究对215名因任何原因在家庭健康中心寻求治疗的成年人进行了研究。数据收集工具包括描述性特征问卷和疫苗犹豫量表。通过多元回归分析(进入模型)检验疫苗犹豫的决定因素。采用STROBE(横断面研究模型)指南报告研究数据。结果:在参与者中,35.3%的人拥有学士及以上学位,62.3%的人有工作,76.7%的人有孩子。71.2%的参与者没有接受过疫苗教育,只有45.6%的参与者认为所有疫苗都是必要和有益的。此外,16.2%的有孩子的参与者被确定为接种疫苗不足的孩子。相信所有疫苗的必要性和益处(ß = -0.245, 95% CI: -4.715至-1.453)、相信强制接种疫苗(ß = -0.137, 95% CI: -4.873至-0.083)、接种COVID-19疫苗(ß = -0.169, 95% CI: -5.925至-0.947)和接种流感疫苗(ß = -0.158, 95% CI: -3.828至-0.429)被确定为预防疫苗犹豫。这些变量解释了24.3%的疫苗犹豫。结论:评估显示,社区表现出适度的疫苗犹豫,并不认为所有疫苗都是必要和有益的。考虑到疫苗对预防传染病、减少残疾和预防死亡的影响,建议提供有关疫苗预防疾病的严重性和疫苗重要性的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Identification of Community Vaccine Hesitancy: A Descriptive-Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: Vaccine hesitancy has become one of the ten global health challenges to be addressed, given its increasing global prevalence.

Aim: This study aimed to identify community vaccine hesitancy and the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy in a provincial center.

Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional research was conducted with 215 adults seeking care at a family health center for any reason. The data collection instruments included the Descriptive Characteristics Questionnaire and the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale. Determinants of vaccine hesitancy were examined through multiple regression analysis (enter model). The STROBE (cross-sectional research model) guidelines were employed for reporting research data.

Results: Among participants, 35.3% had a bachelor's degree or higher, 62.3% were employed, and 76.7% had children. 71.2% of the participants had not received education about vaccines, with only 45.6% considering all vaccines necessary and beneficial. Additionally, 16.2% of the participants with children were identified as having under-vaccinated children. Belief in the necessity and benefits of all vaccines (ß = -0.245, 95% CI: -4.715 to -1.453), belief in making vaccination mandatory (ß = -0.137, 95% CI: -4.873 to -0.083), receiving the COVID-19 vaccine (ß = -0.169, 95% CI: -5.925 to -0.947), and receiving the flu vaccine (ß = -0.158, 95% CI: -3.828 to -0.429) were determined to be protective against vaccine hesitancy. These variables explained 24.3% of vaccine hesitancy.

Conclusions: The assessment revealed that the community exhibited moderate vaccine hesitancy and did not perceive all vaccines as necessary and beneficial. Considering the impact of vaccines on preventing infectious diseases, reducing disabilities, and preventing deaths, it is recommended to provide information about the seriousness of the diseases prevented by vaccines and the importance of vaccines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信