Parents’ experiences and nurses’ perceptions of decision making about childhood immunization
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The uptake of immunization against infectious childhood diseases such as mumps, measles, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis has resulted in positive global health outcomes. The estimated vaccine coverage for these diseases, however, falls below targets recently set by the World Health Organization. The reviewed literature demonstrated that parents have an active role in making decisions about their children's immunization status informed by contextual, individual, and vaccine-specific influences. Few studies addressed nurses' involvement in parental immunization decisions. No qualitative studies could be found that explored Canadian parents' and nurses' perspectives into this complex, contextually-bound phenomenon. The aim of this qualitative study is to understand parents' and nurses' experiences of decision making about childhood immunization, specifically measles-mumps-rubella and/or diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis. Thorne's interpretative description approach was used to facilitate parents' and nurses' sharing of their experiences and perspectives about childhood immunization to capture the relevancy for nursing practice. Results demonstrate that protection was the unifying goal across all parents and nurses. Motivated by protection of their child, parents searched for information about immunization, deliberated the information and sources to determine the relative benefits and risks of immunization, and assumed responsibility for their decision to accept, delay or decline immunization, and accepted responsibility for the consequences of their decision. Nurses described their role as protectors of child safety and population health. Findings of this study suggested that a tension that exists between nurses’ professional obligation to protect the public against vaccine preventable diseases, promote immunization update, yet, respect individual parental choice. Parents desired encounters with health care providers that were open to acknowledging and addressing their concerns in order to protect the health of their child. Future nursing approaches recommended by this study included nurse-led education sessions within a community environment, nurse-led forums that outreach to the public regarding fears and concerns about childhood immunizations, connecting with parents in the community could facilitate better access and improved engagement with health team members, forming partnerships with existing groups, and adding health literacy to the education curriculum could positively impact individual and community health.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,031 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».