↓ Skip to main content

Parental knowledge, attitudes and perception of pneumococcal disease and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in Singapore: a questionnaire-based assessment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Parental knowledge, attitudes and perception of pneumococcal disease and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in Singapore: a questionnaire-based assessment
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3597-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Choon How How, Priscilla Phua See Chun, Fakrudeen Shafi, Rupert W. Jakes

Abstract

Under the National Childhood Immunisation Schedule (NCIS) in Singapore most vaccines are provided free while some, including pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV), added to the NCIS in October 2009, are not free. In contrast to ≥95 % coverage achieved for recommended childhood vaccines that are free, 2013 coverage of the PCV booster dose was 58.9 % (for unclear reasons). To date, no population impact on pneumococcal disease (PD) has been observed. We conducted a questionnaire-based study of parents of young children to assess the value of PCV to parents, and to quantify the extent to which vaccine cost is a barrier to PCV uptake in Singapore. A single, trained interviewer administered a questionnaire to 200 parents ≥21 years of age with young children attending the Singapore Sengkang Polyclinic. The questionnaire asked closed-ended questions on parents' knowledge about PD and PCV. A 5-point Likert scale measured perceived benefits and barriers to PCV vaccination. There were 162 parents whose children were either PCV-vaccinated or who intended to vaccinate their child with PCV (Vaccinated group), and 38 whose children were non-PCV vaccinated or who did not intend to vaccinate (Unvaccinated group). The odds ratio for PCV vaccination among parents who perceived cost as a barrier was 0.16 (95%CI 0.02-1.23). Compared to the Vaccinated group, parents in the Unvaccinated group were less willing to pay for PCV (50.0 %/94.4 %). Compared to the Vaccinated group, fewer parents in the Unvaccinated group had heard about PD (34.2 %/82.1 %) or PCV (36.8 %/69.1 %), or perceived that PD was a threat to their child. Fewer parents in the Unvaccinated group knew that vaccination could prevent PD (28.9 %/77.8 %), or reported that PCV vaccination was recommended to them by any source (63.2 % had no PCV recommendation, versus 20.4 %). When informed that PCV is included in the NCIS only 65.8 % of parents in the Unvaccinated group, versus 98.8 % in the Vaccinated group, indicated that they would be willing to vaccinate their child. Cost considerations, not having vaccination recommended to parents and a lack of knowledge among parents of the benefits of PCV to the child may adversely impact PCV uptake in Singapore.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 23%
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 25 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Psychology 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 27 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,340,423
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,947
of 14,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#294,149
of 337,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#358
of 380 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,017 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 380 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.