File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

Supplementary

Conference Paper: Adults’ preference for influenza vaccination across hypothetical pandemics of three risk levels

TitleAdults’ preference for influenza vaccination across hypothetical pandemics of three risk levels
Authors
Issue Date2018
Citation
The 27th Annual Conference of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe (SRA-E 2018), Mid Sweden University, Östersund, Sweden, 18–20 June 2018 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Promoting vaccination uptake during influenza pandemic remains challenging. Traditional epidemiological questionnaire-based surveys had identified significant factors that could determine people’s vaccination choice during a pandemic but how people made trade-off among these factors when making their vaccination decision is unclear. This study measured the relative effects of altering different factors (attributes) in determining vaccination preference and compared their relative importance across three hypothetical pandemics: 1918-like influenza pandemic, avian influenza A/H5N1-like influenza pandemic and the 2009 influenza A/H1N1-like pandemic. Methods: A total of 200 Hong Kong adults from the general public completed a tablet-assisted discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey. Multinomial logit models were conducted to evaluate relative preference weights for seven pre-determined attributes (i.e. infection probability (IP), case-fatality ratio of influenza (CFR), vaccine safety, vaccine efficacy, vaccination cost, prevalence of vaccination uptake in the community and doctors’ advice for vaccination. Results: In a mild pandemic (2009 influenza A/H1N1-like pandemic) of which IP and CFR are set to be 10% and 0.1%, respectively, influenza risk was less important than was vaccination risk, while community vaccination uptake rate played a dominant role followed by vaccine efficacy and doctors’ advice, in determining vaccination preference. In a 1918 influenza-like pandemic (IP: 20%, CFR: 10%), community vaccination uptake rate was the most important, followed by vaccine efficacy and doctors’ advice, in determining vaccination choice. In an A/H5N1-like pandemic (IP: 30% and CFR: 20%), influenza risk became the dominant influence on vaccination preference. Conclusion: In a mild pandemic when population concern over vaccine risk is likely to be an important barrier for promoting vaccination uptake, doctors’ recommendation for vaccination and reporting the increasing vaccination statistics may be helpful to improve uptake. In a severe pandemic, information of disease risk becomes the most important determinant of those studied that promotes vaccination uptake.
DescriptionTheme: Risk & Uncertainty – From Critical Thinking to Practical Impact
Oral Session: Risk and decision analysis in critical infrastructure, part III - no. S41-01
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/259011

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLiao, Q-
dc.contributor.authorLam, WWT-
dc.contributor.authorLam, C-
dc.contributor.authorFielding, R-
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-03T04:00:05Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-03T04:00:05Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationThe 27th Annual Conference of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe (SRA-E 2018), Mid Sweden University, Östersund, Sweden, 18–20 June 2018-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/259011-
dc.descriptionTheme: Risk & Uncertainty – From Critical Thinking to Practical Impact-
dc.descriptionOral Session: Risk and decision analysis in critical infrastructure, part III - no. S41-01-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Promoting vaccination uptake during influenza pandemic remains challenging. Traditional epidemiological questionnaire-based surveys had identified significant factors that could determine people’s vaccination choice during a pandemic but how people made trade-off among these factors when making their vaccination decision is unclear. This study measured the relative effects of altering different factors (attributes) in determining vaccination preference and compared their relative importance across three hypothetical pandemics: 1918-like influenza pandemic, avian influenza A/H5N1-like influenza pandemic and the 2009 influenza A/H1N1-like pandemic. Methods: A total of 200 Hong Kong adults from the general public completed a tablet-assisted discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey. Multinomial logit models were conducted to evaluate relative preference weights for seven pre-determined attributes (i.e. infection probability (IP), case-fatality ratio of influenza (CFR), vaccine safety, vaccine efficacy, vaccination cost, prevalence of vaccination uptake in the community and doctors’ advice for vaccination. Results: In a mild pandemic (2009 influenza A/H1N1-like pandemic) of which IP and CFR are set to be 10% and 0.1%, respectively, influenza risk was less important than was vaccination risk, while community vaccination uptake rate played a dominant role followed by vaccine efficacy and doctors’ advice, in determining vaccination preference. In a 1918 influenza-like pandemic (IP: 20%, CFR: 10%), community vaccination uptake rate was the most important, followed by vaccine efficacy and doctors’ advice, in determining vaccination choice. In an A/H5N1-like pandemic (IP: 30% and CFR: 20%), influenza risk became the dominant influence on vaccination preference. Conclusion: In a mild pandemic when population concern over vaccine risk is likely to be an important barrier for promoting vaccination uptake, doctors’ recommendation for vaccination and reporting the increasing vaccination statistics may be helpful to improve uptake. In a severe pandemic, information of disease risk becomes the most important determinant of those studied that promotes vaccination uptake.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofThe 27th Annual Conference of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe (SRA-E 2018)-
dc.titleAdults’ preference for influenza vaccination across hypothetical pandemics of three risk levels-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.identifier.emailLiao, Q: qyliao11@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailLam, WWT: wwtlam@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailLam, C: cylam1@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailFielding, R: fielding@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityLiao, Q=rp02100-
dc.identifier.authorityLam, WWT=rp00443-
dc.identifier.authorityFielding, R=rp00339-
dc.identifier.hkuros288511-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats