Cited by 507Vaccine Coverage and HesitancyPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare

The Architecture of Provider-Parent Vaccine Discussions at Health Supervision Visits

Open access
Opel, Douglas J., Heritage, John, Taylor, James A., Mangione-Smith, Rita, Salas, Halle Showalter, DeVere, Victoria, Zhou, Chuan, Robinson, Jeffrey D.·2013·Pediatrics

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To characterize provider-parent vaccine communication and determine the influence of specific provider communication practices on parent resistance to vaccine recommendations. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study in which we videotaped provider-parent vaccine discussions during health supervision visits. Parents of children aged 1 to 19 months old were screened by using the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines survey. We oversampled vaccine-hesitant parents (VHPs), defined as a score ≥50. We developed a coding scheme of 15 communication practices and applied it to all visits. We used multivariate logistic regression to explore the association between provider communication practices and parent resistance to vaccines, controlling for parental hesitancy status and demographic and visit characteristics. RESULTS: We analyzed 111 vaccine discussions involving 16 providers from 9 practices; 50% included VHPs. Most providers (74%) initiated vaccine recommendations with presumptive (eg, “Well, we have to do some shots”) rather than participatory (eg, “What do you want to do about shots?”) formats. Among parents who voiced resistance to provider initiation (41%), significantly more were VHPs than non-VHPs. Parents had significantly higher odds of resisting vaccine recommendations if the provider used a participatory rather than a presumptive initiation format (adjusted odds ratio: 17.5; 95% confidence interval: 1.2–253.5). When parents resisted, 50% of providers pursued their original recommendations (eg, “He really needs these shots”), and 47% of initially resistant parents subsequently accepted recommendations when they did. CONCLUSIONS: How providers initiate and pursue vaccine recommendations is associated with parental vaccine acceptance.

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 · 10.1542/peds.2013-2037

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Virtual simulation games can provide psychological safety and lessen fear, anxiety, and embarrassment in new learners who worry about making mistakes in front of fellow students and instructors.

    “VSGs can also provide psychological safety and lessen fear, anxiety, and embarrassment in new learners who may worry about making mistakes in front of fellow students and instructors [16–18].”

    From Development and evaluation of virtual simulation games to increase the confidence and self-efficacy of healthcare learners in vaccine communication, advocacy, and promotion (2024) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Qualitative and Study Participants sections describe coding training and observation of pediatric vaccine discussions, not virtual simulation games. Searches for psychological safety and for learners’ fear of making mistakes found no passage addressing whether games reduce fear, anxiety, or embarrassment; page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Healthcare providers are most likely to improve their confidence in communication skills through repeated practice with patients, and simulations are an effective way to emulate real patient scenarios.

    “Ultimately, HCPs are most likely to improve their confidence in communication skills through repeated practice with patients, and simulations are an effective way to emulate real patient scenarios.”

    From Development and evaluation of virtual simulation games to increase the confidence and self-efficacy of healthcare learners in vaccine communication, advocacy, and promotion (2024) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Discussion describes communication practices associated with parental vaccine resistance, not how providers gain confidence in their communication skills. Searches for repeated practice with patients and for simulations found no passage addressing either claim; the Qualitative section's training session concerns researchers coding encounters, not provider training. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Schegloff E. A Primer of Conversation Analysis: Sequence Organization. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2005
  2. Schegloff EA. Sequence Organization in In- teraction: A Primer in Conversation Analy- sis. Vol 1. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 2007

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Opel, D. J., Heritage, J., Taylor, J. A., Mangione-Smith, R., Salas, H. S., DeVere, V., Zhou, C., & Robinson, J. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Seattle Children's Research Institute (US)
  • Portland State University (US)
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2013-12-01
Volume
132
Issue
6
Pages
1037-1046
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2116049831
Cited by
507
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 2
FWCI
36.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1K23HD06947, K23HD069467)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Keywords
vaccine hesitancy, vaccine communication, childhood immunization, vaccine recommendations, participatory communication, vaccine acceptance, pediatric primary care
MeSH terms
Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Parents, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Professional-Family Relations, Vaccination, Video Recording, Washington, Multivariate Analysis, Logistic Models, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Qualitative Research, Directive Counseling

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