Reasons for measles cases not being vaccinated with MMR: investigation into parents' and carers' views following a large measles outbreak
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Uptake rates for the combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine have been below the required 95% in the UK since a retracted and discredited article linking the MMR vaccine with autism and inflammatory bowel disease was released in 1998. This study undertook semi-structured telephone interviews among parents or carers of 47 unvaccinated measles cases who were aged between 13 months and 9 years, during a large measles outbreak in Merseyside. Results showed that concerns over the specific links with autism remain an important cause of refusal to vaccinate, with over half of respondents stating this as a reason. A quarter stated child illness during scheduled vaccination time, while other reasons included general safety concerns and access issues. Over half of respondents felt that more information or a discussion with a health professional would help the decision-making process, while a third stated improved access. There was clear support for vaccination among respondents when asked about current opinions regarding MMR vaccine. The findings support the hypothesis that safety concerns remain a major barrier to MMR vaccination, and also support previous evidence that experience of measles is an important determinant in the decision to vaccinate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".