IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v15y2018i8p1743-d163620.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to Participate in Vaccine-Related Clinical Trials among Older Adults

Author

Listed:
  • Divyanshu Raheja

    (Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA)

  • Evelyn P. Davila

    (Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA)

  • Eric T. Johnson

    (Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA)

  • Rijalda Deović

    (Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA)

  • Michele Paine

    (Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA)

  • Nadine Rouphael

    (Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to understand among a convenience sample of 400 adults aged 60 years of age or older (1) reasons for being willing or unwilling to participate in a vaccine clinical research study and (2) overall perceptions about vaccine clinical research. A cross-sectional study using a sample of older adults residing in the metro-Atlanta area and surrounding neighborhoods was conducted. The study questionnaire contained 37 questions, including questions about socio-demographics and perceptions about clinical trial processes. Statistical analysis was conducted using logistic regression. The adjusted modeling results indicated that sex, distance to research clinic, and being informed about the research findings played a role in the likelihood of an elderly person participating in a vaccine study. Males were more likely to participate in clinical trials as compared to females (OR: 2.486; CI: 1.042–5.934). Most participants were willing to travel up to 25 miles from the research clinic. Of the respondents, 45% were unlikely to participate if the results of the current trial are not shared. Improving access to clinical trials in terms of distance traveled and ensuring streamlined processes to inform participants about the results of the trial in the future would increase willingness to participate in vaccine clinical trials. The survey could serve as a useful tool for conducting vaccine studies and other clinical trials by understanding the barriers specific to the elderly.

Suggested Citation

  • Divyanshu Raheja & Evelyn P. Davila & Eric T. Johnson & Rijalda Deović & Michele Paine & Nadine Rouphael, 2018. "Willingness to Participate in Vaccine-Related Clinical Trials among Older Adults," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-12, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:8:p:1743-:d:163620
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/8/1743/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/8/1743/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herrera, A.P. & Snipes, S.A. & King, D.W. & Torres-Vigil, I. & Goldberg, D.S. & Wenberg, A.D., 2010. "Disparate inclusion of older adults in clinical trials: priorities and opportunities for policy and practice change," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(S1), pages 105-112.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liat Ayalon, 2020. "Life in a world for all ages: From a utopic idea to reality," Journal of Elder Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 39-67, June.
    2. Valérie Seegers & Ludovic Trinquart & Isabelle Boutron & Philippe Ravaud, 2013. "Comparison of Treatment Effect Estimates for Pharmacological Randomized Controlled Trials Enrolling Older Adults Only and Those including Adults: A Meta-Epidemiological Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-5, May.
    3. Lorraine Greaves & Andreea C. Brabete & Mira Maximos & Ella Huber & Alice Li & Mê-Linh Lê & Sherif Eltonsy & Madeline Boscoe, 2023. "Sex, Gender, and the Regulation of Prescription Drugs: Omissions and Opportunities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Valentyn Litvin, 2020. "When ignorance is bliss: Intentional agnosticism in drug approval," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 185-194, February.
    5. Jesse M. Bell & Tina M. Mason & Harleah G. Buck & Cindy S. Tofthagen & Allyson R. Duffy & Maureen W. Groër & James P. McHale & Kevin E. Kip, 2021. "Challenges in Obtaining and Assessing Salivary Cortisol and α-Amylase in an Over 60 Population Undergoing Psychotherapeutic Treatment for Complicated Grief: Lessons Learned," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 30(5), pages 680-689, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:15:y:2018:i:8:p:1743-:d:163620. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.