CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 66Vaccine Coverage and HesitancyHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsEconomic and Environmental Valuation

HIV vaccine acceptability among communities at risk: The impact of vaccine characteristics

Open access
Newman, Peter A., Duan, Naihua, Lee, Sung-Jae, Rudy, Ellen T., Seiden, Danielle S., Kakinami, Lisa, Cunningham, William E.·2006·Vaccine
DOI 10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.11.013PMC PMC2819665
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

HIV vaccines offer the best long-term hope of controlling the AIDS pandemic; yet, the advent of HIV vaccines will not ensure their acceptability. We conducted a cross-sectional survey (n=143), incorporating conjoint analysis, to assess HIV vaccine acceptability among participants recruited using multi-site (n=9), venue-based sampling in Los Angeles. We used a fractional factorial experimental design to construct eight hypothetical HIV vaccines, each with seven dichotomous attributes. The acceptability of each vaccine was assessed individually and then averaged across participants. Next, the impact of each attribute on vaccine acceptability was estimated for each participant using ANOVA and then analyzed across participants. Acceptability of the eight hypothetical HIV vaccines ranged from 33.2 (S.D. 34.9) to 82.2 (S.D. 31.3) on a 0-100 scale; mean=60.0 (S.D. 21.9). Efficacy had the greatest impact on acceptability (22.7; CI: 18.5-27.1; p<0.0001), followed by cross-clade protection (12.5; CI: 8.7-16.3, p<0.0001), side effects (11.5; CI: 7.4-15.5; p<0.0001), and duration of protection (6.1; CI: 3.2-9.0; p<.0001). Route of administration, number of doses and cost were not significant. Low acceptability of "partial efficacy" vaccines may present obstacles to future HIV vaccine dissemination. Educational and social marketing interventions may be necessary to ensure broad HIV vaccine uptake.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.11.013

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Cohen J. A setback and an advance on the AIDS vaccine front. Science 2003;300(5616):28-9. [PubMed: 12677027]
  2. Cohen J. Vaccine results lose significance under scrutiny. Science 2003;299(5612):1495. [PubMed: 12624237]
  3. Francis DP, Heyward WL, Popovic V, Orozco-Cronin P, Orelind K, Gee C, et al. Candidate HIV/ AIDS vaccines: lessons learned from the world's first phase III efficacy trials. AIDS 2003;17(2): 147-56. [PubMed: 12545073]
  4. Klausner RD, Fauci AS, Corey LN, Nabel GJ, Gayle H, Berkley S, et al. The need for a global HIV vaccine enterprise. Science 2003;300(5628):2036-9. [PubMed: 12829768]
  5. Gilbert PB, DeGruttola VG, Hudgens MG, Self SG, Hammer SM, Corey L. What constitutes efficacy for a human immunodeficiency virus vaccine that ameliorates viremia: issues involving surrogate end points in phase 3 trials. J Infect Dis 2003;188(2):179-93. [PubMed: 12854072]
  6. Levy JA. What can be achieved with an HIV vaccine? Lancet 2001;357(9251):223-4. [PubMed: 11213112]
  7. Anderson RM, Garnet GP. Low-efficacy HIV vaccines: potential for community-based intervention programmes. Lancet 1996;348(9033):1010-3. [PubMed: 8855867]
  8. Hu DJ, Vitek CR, Bartholow B, Mastro TD. Key issues for a potential human immunodeficiency virus vaccine. Clin Infect Dis 2003;36(5):638-44. [PubMed: 12594646]
  9. Esparza J, Chang ML, Widdus R, Madrid Y, Walker N, Ghys PD. Estimation of "needs" and "probable uptake" for HIV/AIDS preventive vaccines based on possible policies and likely acceptance (a WHO/UNAIDS/IAVI study). Vaccine 2003;21(17-18):2041-50.
  10. Alter MJ, Hadler SC, Margolis HS, Alexander WJ, Hu PY, Judson FN, et al. The changing epidemiology of hepatitis B in the United States. JAMA 1990;263(9):1218-22. [PubMed: 2304237]
  11. Institute of Medicine. Calling the shots: immunization finance policies and practices. National Academy Press; Washington: 2000.
  12. Schutten M, de Wit JBF, van Steenbergen JE. Why do gay men want to be vaccinated against hepatitis B? An assessment of psychosocial determinants of vaccination intention. Int J STD AIDS 2002;13(2):86-90. [PubMed: 11839162]
  13. Egede LE, Zheng D. Racial/ethnic differences in influenza vaccination coverage in high-risk adults. Am J Public Health 2003;93(12):2074-8. [PubMed: 14652337]
  14. Zimmerman RK, Ball JA. Vaccinations in adults: missed opportunities. Am Fam Physician 1998;58 (4):850-4. [PubMed: 9767720]
  15. de Wit JB, Vet R, Schutten M, van Steenbergen J. Social-cognitive determinants of vaccination behavior against hepatitis B: an assessment among men who have sex with men. Prev Med 2005;40 (6):795-802. [PubMed: 15850881]
  16. Rhodes SD, Hergenrather KC. Exploring hepatitis B vaccination acceptance among young men who have sex with men: facilitators and barriers. Prev Med 2002;35(2):128-34. [PubMed: 12200097]
  17. Liau A, Zimet GD, Fortenberry JD. Attitudes about human immunodeficiency virus immunization: the influence of health beliefs and vaccine characteristics. Sex Transm Dis 1998;25(2):76-81. [PubMed: 9518382]
  18. Webb PM, Zimet GD, Mays R, Fortenberry JD. HIV immunization: acceptability and anticipated effects on sexual behavior among adolescents. J Adolesc Health 1999;2(5):320-2. [PubMed: 10551661]
  19. Zimet GD, Blythe MJ, Fortenberry JD. Vaccine characteristics and acceptability of HIV immunization among adolescents. Int J STD AIDS 2000;11(3):143-9. [PubMed: 10726935]
  20. Liau A, Zimet GD. The acceptability of HIV immunization: examining vaccine characteristics as determining factors. AIDS Care 2001;13(5):643-50. [PubMed: 11571011]
  21. Newman PA, Duan N, Rudy ET, Roberts KJ, Swendeman D. Post-trial HIV vaccine adoption: concerns, motivators, and intentions among persons at risk for HIV. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2004;37(3):1393-403. [PubMed: 15483469]
  22. Diamant AL, Hays RD, Morales LS, Ford W, Calmes D, Asch S, et al. Delays and unmet need for health care among adult primary care patients in a restructured urban public health system. Am J Public Health 2004;94(5):783-9. [PubMed: 15117701]
  23. Frankel MR, Shapiro MF, Duan N, Morton SC, Berry SH, Brown JA, et al. National probability samples in studies of low-prevalence diseases. Part II: designing and implementing the HIV cost and services utilization study sample. Health Serv Res 1999;34(5 Part 1):969-92. [PubMed: 10591268]
  24. Singleton, R.; Straits, BC. Approaches to Social Research. 3rd ed.. Oxford University Press; New York: 1999.
  25. Green PE, Srinivasan V. Conjoint analysis in consumer research: issues and outlook. J Consumer Res 1978;5(2):103-23.
  26. Green PE, Srinivasan V. Conjoint analysis in marketing: new developments with implications for research and practice. J Marketing 1990;54(4):3-19.
  27. Luce RD, Tukey JW. Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement. J Math Psychol 1964;1:1-27.
  28. Hay J. Conjoint analysis in pharmaceutical research. J Managed Care Pharm 2002;8(3):206-8.
  29. Phillips KA, Maddala T, Johnson FR. Measuring preferences for health care interventions using conjoint analysis: an application to HIV testing. Health Serv Res 2002;37(6):1681-705. [PubMed: 12546292]
  30. Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 2000;320(7248): 1530-3. [PubMed: 10834905]
  31. Bingham M, Johnson FR, Miller D. Modeling choice behavior for new pharmaceutical products. Value Health 2001;4(1):1-13. [PubMed: 11704967]
  32. Plackett RL, Burman JP. The design of optimum multifactorial experiments. Biometrika 1946;33:305-25.
  33. Ryan M, McIntosh E, Shackley P. Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care. Health Econ 1998;7(4):373-8. [PubMed: 9683097]
  34. Newman PA, Duan N, Rudy ET, Johnston-Roberts K. HIV risk and prevention in a post-vaccine context. Vaccine 2004;22(15-16):1954-63. [PubMed: 15121308]
  35. McCaffrey D, Duan N, Morton S. Propagation of nonresponse weights for censoring in multi-phase screening in complex sample designs. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol 2000;1(3-4):213-31.
  36. Blower SM, McLean AR. Prophylactic vaccines, risk behavior change, and the probability of eradicating HIV in San Francisco. Science 1994;265(5177):1451-4. [PubMed: 8073289]
  37. Johnston R. AIDSVAX results: an answer, or just more questions? AIDS Patient Care STDs 2003;17 (2):47-51. [PubMed: 12650142]
  38. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV/AIDS Surveillance Supplemental Report: AIDS cases by state and metropolitan area of residence, 2000. Vol. 8. Centers for Disease Control and prevention; Atlanta: 2002.
  39. Francis DP, Gregory T, McElrath MJ, Belshe RB, Gorse GJ, Migasena S, et al. Advancing AIDSVAX to phase 3. Safety, immunogenicity, and plans for phase 3. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 1998;14(Suppl 3):S325-31. [PubMed: 9814961]
  40. Woodland DL. Jump-starting the immune system: prime-boosting comes of age. Trends Immunol 2004;25(2):98-104. [PubMed: 15102369]
  41. Devico AL, Fouts TR, Shata MT, Kamin-Lewis R, Lewis GK, Hone DM. Development of an oral prime-boost strategy to elicit broadly neutralizing antibodies against HIV-1. Vaccine 2002;20(15): 1968-74. [PubMed: 11983256]
  42. Newman PA, Duan N, Rudy ET, Anton PA. Challenges for HIV vaccine dissemination and clinical trial recruitment: if we build it, will they come? AIDS Patient Care STDs 2004;18(12):691-701. [PubMed: 15659880]
  43. Rudy ET, Newman PA, Duan N, Kelly EM, Roberts KJ, Seiden DS. HIV vaccine acceptability among women at risk: perceived barriers and facilitators to future HIV vaccine uptake. AIDS Educ Prev 2005;17(3):253-67. [PubMed: 16006211]
  44. Holmberg SD. The estimated prevalence and incidence of HIV in 96 large US metropolitan areas. Am J Public Health 1996;86(5):642-54. [PubMed: 8629714]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Newman, P. A., Duan, N., Lee, S.-J., Rudy, E. T., Seiden, D. S., Kakinami, L., & Cunningham, W. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Newman, Peter A.
ORCID
Venue
Vaccine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-03
Volume
24
Issue
12
Pages
2094-2101
ISSN
0264-410X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.11.013
PMC
PMC2819665
OpenAlex
W2046652033
Cited by
66
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Vaccine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TSpace (University of Toronto) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH069087, P30MH058107)
  • UCLA AIDS Institute
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
Keywords
vaccine characteristics, vaccine efficacy, vaccine side effects, duration of protection, route of administration, vaccine cost, vaccine uptake, social marketing, conjoint analysis, fractional factorial design, Los Angeles
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Community Health Services, Female, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Risk Factors, Sexual Behavior, HIV Infections, AIDS Vaccines

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review