IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v35y2015i8p948-958.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preferences for Vaccination

Author

Listed:
  • Jorien Veldwijk
  • Iris van der Heide
  • Jany Rademakers
  • A. Jantine Schuit
  • G. Ardine de Wit
  • Ellen Uiters
  • Mattijs S. Lambooij

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of this study is to examine to what extent health literacy is associated with parental preferences concerning childhood vaccination. Methods. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 467 Dutch parents of newborns aged 6 weeks (response rate of 37%). A self-reported questionnaire was used to measure health literacy by means of Chew’s Set of Brief Screening Questions, as well as parental preferences for rotavirus vaccination by means of a discrete choice experiment. Five rotavirus-related characteristics were included (i.e., vaccine effectiveness, frequency of severe side effects, location of vaccination, protection duration, and out-of-pocket costs). Panel latent class models were conducted, and health literacy and educational level were added to the class probability model to determine the association between health literacy and study outcomes. Results. Lower educated and lower health literate respondents considered protection duration to be more important and vaccine effectiveness and frequency of severe side effects to be less important compared with higher educated and higher health literate respondents. While all respondents were willing to vaccinate against rotavirus when the vaccine was offered as part of the National Immunization Program, only lower educated and lower health literate parents were willing to vaccinate when the vaccine was offered on the free market. Conclusion: Health literacy is associated with parents’ preferences for rotavirus vaccination. Whether differences in vaccination decisions are actually due to varying preferences or might be better explained by varying levels of understanding should be further investigated. To contribute to more accurate interpretation of study results, it may be advisable that researchers measure and report health literacy when they study vaccination decision behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorien Veldwijk & Iris van der Heide & Jany Rademakers & A. Jantine Schuit & G. Ardine de Wit & Ellen Uiters & Mattijs S. Lambooij, 2015. "Preferences for Vaccination," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(8), pages 948-958, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:35:y:2015:i:8:p:948-958
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15597225
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X15597225
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X15597225?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mickael Bech & Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen, 2005. "Effects coding in discrete choice experiments," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(10), pages 1079-1083, October.
    2. Poulos, Christine & Yang, Jui-Chen & Levin, Carol & Van Minh, Hoang & Giang, Kim Bao & Nguyen, Diep, 2011. "Mothers' preferences and willingness to pay for HPV vaccines in Vinh Long Province, Vietnam," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 226-234, July.
    3. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    4. Peretti-Watel, Patrick & Raude, Jocelyn & Sagaon-Teyssier, Luis & Constant, Aymery & Verger, Pierre & Beck, François, 2014. "Attitudes toward vaccination and the H1N1 vaccine: Poor people's unfounded fears or legitimate concerns of the elite?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 10-18.
    5. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, September.
    6. Jane Hall & Patricia Kenny & Madeleine King & Jordan Louviere & Rosalie Viney & Angela Yeoh, 2002. "Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to evaluate the introduction of varicella vaccination," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(5), pages 457-465, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Edoh Y. Amiran & Joni S. James Charles, 2021. "Reconciling revealed and stated measures for willingness to pay in recreation by building a probability model," Papers 2107.14343, arXiv.org.
    2. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Viberg Johansson, Jennifer & Shah, Nisha & Haraldsdóttir, Eik & Bentzen, Heidi Beate & Coy, Sarah & Kaye, Jane & Mascalzoni, Deborah & Veldwijk, Jorien, 2021. "Governance mechanisms for sharing of health data: An approach towards selecting attributes for complex discrete choice experiment studies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    4. Mariusz Duplaga, 2020. "The Acceptance of Key Public Health Interventions by the Polish Population Is Related to Health Literacy, But Not eHealth Literacy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-19, July.
    5. Bing Wang & Gang Chen & Julie Ratcliffe & Hossein Haji Ali Afzali & Lynne Giles & Helen Marshall, 2017. "Adolescent values for immunisation programs in Australia: A discrete choice experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, July.
    6. Carlo Della Pelle & Vincenzo Orsatti & Francesco Cipollone & Giancarlo Cicolini, 2018. "Health literacy among caregivers of patients with heart failure: A multicentre cross‐sectional survey," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3-4), pages 859-865, February.
    7. Andersson, Alfred & Winslott Hiselius, Lena & Adell, Emeli, 2020. "The effect of marketing messages on the motivation to reduce private car use in different segments," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 22-30.
    8. Luyten, Jeroen & Kessels, Roselinde & Atkins, Katherine E. & Jit, Mark & van Hoek, Albert Jan, 2019. "Quantifying the public's view on social value judgments in vaccine decision-making: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 181-193.

    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. Goedele Van den Broeck & Kaat Van Hoyweghen & Miet Maertens, 2016. "Employment Conditions in the Senegalese Horticultural Export Industry: A Worker Perspective," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 34(2), pages 301-319, March.
    2. Alessandro Mengoni & Chiara Seghieri & Sabina Nuti, 2013. "The application of discrete choice experiments in health economics: a systematic review of the literature," Working Papers 201301, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    3. Waleska Sigüernza & Petr Mariel, 2013. "Valoración económica de los servicios sanitarios en la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 207(4), pages 71-99, December.
    4. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    5. Beaudet, Chloé & Tardieu, Léa & David, Maia, 2022. "Are citizens willing to accept changes in public lighting for biodiversity conservation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    6. Chad M. Baum & Robert Weigelt, 2019. "How Where I Shop Influences What I Buy: The Importance of the Retail Format in Sustainable Tomato Consumption," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Chai & Chad M. Baum (ed.), Demand, Complexity, and Long-Run Economic Evolution, pages 141-169, Springer.
    7. Ardeshiri, Ali & Safarighouzhdi, Farshid & Hossein Rashidi, Taha, 2021. "Measuring willingness to pay for shared parking," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 186-202.
    8. Ola, Oreoluwa & Menapace, Luisa, 2020. "Smallholders' perceptions and preferences for market attributes promoting sustained participation in modern agricultural value chains," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    9. Jesús Clemente López & Pedro García Castrillo & María A. González Alvarez & Marcos Sanso Frago, 2014. "Una evaluación de la efectividad de la formación ocupacional para desempleados antes y después de la crisis económica: el caso de Aragón," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 208(1), pages 77-106, March.
    10. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2008. "Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 661-677, August.
    11. Pienaar, Elizabeth F. & Soto, José R. & Lai, John H. & Adams, Damian C., 2019. "Would County Residents Vote for an Increase in Their Taxes to Conserve Native Habitat and Ecosystem Services? Funding Conservation in Palm Beach County, Florida," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 24-34.
    12. Zhou, Jiehong & Liu, Qing & Mao, Rui & Yu, Xiaohua, 2017. "Habit spillovers or induced awareness: Willingness to pay for eco-labels of rice in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 62-73.
    13. David Hensher & John Rose & Zheng Li, 2012. "Does the choice model method and/or the data matter?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 351-385, March.
    14. Joachim Marti, 2012. "Assessing preferences for improved smoking cessation medications: a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(5), pages 533-548, October.
    15. Gevrek, Z.Eylem & Uyduranoglu, Ayse, 2015. "Public preferences for carbon tax attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 186-197.
    16. Lancsar, Emily & Louviere, Jordan & Flynn, Terry, 2007. "Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(8), pages 1738-1753, April.
    17. Emmanouil Mentzakis & Mandy Ryan & Paul McNamee, 2011. "Using discrete choice experiments to value informal care tasks: exploring preference heterogeneity," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(8), pages 930-944, August.
    18. Baskaran, Ramesh & Cullen, Ross & Colombo, Sergio, 2010. "Testing different types of benefit transfer in valuation of ecosystem services: New Zealand winegrowing case studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1010-1022, March.
    19. Terry N. Flynn & Elisabeth Huynh & Tim J. Peters & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Sam Clemens & Alison Moody & Joanna Coast, 2015. "Scoring the Icecap‐a Capability Instrument. Estimation of a UK General Population Tariff," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 258-269, March.
    20. Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nicholas & Torres, Cati, 2011. "Incorrectly accounting for taste heterogeneity in choice experiments: Does it really matter for welfare measurement?," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2011-02, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.

    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:sae:medema:v:35:y:2015:i:8:p:948-958. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.