The role of health literacy in vaccination behaviours: a systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Health literacy (HL) is recognized as a driver of health-promoting behaviors, including preventive actions. However the influence of HL on vaccines uptake remains unclear. This study aimed at summarize the evidence on the role of HL in vaccination behaviors. Methods PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. Observational studies of any design conducted worldwide, published through June 2021 and investigated the association between HL and vaccination intention or status using HL validated tools were included. Any vaccine was considered. An adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess quality. Results Twenty-one articles were included, 6 investigated intention to vaccinate and 15 explored vaccination status. Studies of the first group had a cross-sectional design, considered anti-COVID-19 vaccination and were judged of high or fair quality. Population investigated was heterogeneous as well as the tool used to assess HL. Five analysis provided adjusted estimates. HL seemed not influence the vaccination intention in 3 studies whereas adequate HL was associated with positive attitude to get vaccinated in the remained 3 ones. The majority of articles assessed vaccine status, had a cross sectional design (N = 11) and were of high quality (N = 8). The HL tool more frequently used was TOFHLA (N = 5), sample investigated was heterogeneous included parents of children who received vaccinations (N = 5). Four articles considered multiple vaccinations, thus providing a total of 19 analysis. Vaccine against influenza was the most investigated (N = 11) and 15 studies provided adjusted estimates. No association was found between HL and the receipt of vaccination in 11 analysis, whereas HL levels significantly influenced vaccination uptake in 8 studies. Conclusions Health literacy did not seem to strongly influence people decision on vaccinations. Difference in population and vaccines considered, but also in tool used to measure HL might explain the heterogeneity of the results. Key messages • The impact of HL on vaccination behaviours remains controversial. • Efforts to extend the studies on targeted populations applying a comprehensive HL measurement tool should be devised.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,104 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».