MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2470802589

Parents of Children with Autism: Issues Surrounding Childhood Vaccination

2015· article· en· W2470802589 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
April M. Young, Abigail Elliston, Lisa A. Ruble

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational public health journal · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAutismDistrustPsychological interventionVaccinationAutism spectrum disorderMedicinePublic healthPsychiatryPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapistImmunologyNursing
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

IntroductionDespite increasing evidence of genetic causes of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (1-3) and an authoritative review rejecting a causal association between MMR vaccination and ASD (4), fear that childhood vaccines play a key role in the etiology of ASD persists (5). In fact, a review by Brown and colleagues (6) identified a significant association between parents' belief that vaccines cause autism and lower vaccine uptake. The controversy continues to attract media attention and many parents remain skeptical about the safety of childhood vaccines (7,8). The issue is particularly salient for parents of children with autism (PCA) and, with an estimated ASD prevalence of one in 88 (9), vaccine uptake among this group could have a substantive impact on public health.Online surveys of parents involved with autism organizations in the US and Canada revealed that 40% of parents believed that vaccines were among the most significant contributory factors involved in their child's autism (10). Many factors play a role in producing these beliefs, including the temporal proximity of childhood vaccination and the manifestation of autism, distrust of governmental agencies, perceptions of the risks posed by vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), and information from popular media sources (11). Several studies have suggested that the latter, especially web-based sources, may fuel distrust in childhood vaccinations (12-15); yet, given limitations in extant research, developing interventions to address these influences would be challenging (16).Healthcare providers are on the frontlines in the debate about vaccines and autism, and can have a substantial influence on decisions about childhood vaccination (17-21). Therefore, it remains critical that healthcare providers offer information to caregivers, and to PCA, as early after diagnosis as possible (17). The purpose of this study was to examine attitudes toward childhood vaccination among PCA. The association between various dimensions of healthcare satisfaction, vaccine attitudes, and child autism severity and cognitive ability was explored, as was exposure to media sources portraying a link between vaccines and autism.Our studyA convenience sample of PCA were recruited through their participation in randomized controlled trials of a parent-teacher consultation intervention in Kentucky and Indiana (22,23). All children met the diagnostic and statistical manual IV-TR definition of autistic disorder (24) as confirmed by professionally-administered Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule Modules 1 or 2 (25). Parents (n=79) were mailed two self-administered surveys assessing their attitudes toward childhood vaccines and their satisfaction with their child's medical care. Fifty parents completed the Parent Satisfaction with Care Questionnaire and 49 completed the Vaccine Attitude Questionnaire (described below). Respondents were not significantly different than non-respondents in terms of child's age, parental education level, income, or race. All study procedures were approved by the University's Institutional Review Board.Demographic information including child age, gender, race, household income, number of siblings, and parent education level was collected (described in table 1). Measures assessing children's severity of autism (Childhood Autism Rating Scale; CARS) and cognitive ability (Differential Abilities Scale; DAS) were administered by the research team (23). The CARS is a valid and reliable, observational scale comprised of 15 items evaluating behaviors such as social relating, resistance to change, communication, and body use (26). The General Conceptual Ability subscore of the DAS, which has strong internal and test-retest reliability (27), was used to assess children's cognitive ability.Participants also completed questionnaires assessing their satisfaction with their child's primary healthcare provider (PCP); Table 2 provides example items and coefficient alphas for subscales. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,160
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,360

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,062
Tête enseignante GPT0,372
Écart entre enseignants0,310 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational public health journalMême sujetVaccine Coverage and HesitancyTravaux en français237 207