COVID-19 儿科疫苗授权、FDA 权威和个人对风险的误解

IF 4.7 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-04-19 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsae006
Joanna K Sax, Neal Doran
{"title":"COVID-19 儿科疫苗授权、FDA 权威和个人对风险的误解","authors":"Joanna K Sax, Neal Doran","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsae006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Vaccines are one component to the public health strategies to alleviate the COVID-19 pandemic. Hesitancy regarding COVID-19 vaccines in the United States has been problematic, which is not surprising given increasing overall vaccine hesitancy in recent decades. Most vaccines are administered during childhood years. Consequently, understanding hesitancy toward administration of vaccines in this age group may provide insight into possible interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy. The present study analyzed a subset of over 130,000 public comments posted in response to a notice of meeting of the vaccine advisory group to the Food and Drug Administration. The meeting addressed whether to recommend Emergency Use Authorization (‘EUA’) of the COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5–11. The results of the study demonstrate that most comments opposed EUA and these comments were associated with statements that indicated misperceptions of risk. Findings provide interesting insights regarding the role of public comments generally but also suggest that the public participation process in notice and comment can be modified to serve as an intervention to align individual perceptions of risk more closely with evidence-based assessment of risk. In addition, the findings provide opportunities to consider strategies for public health messaging.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":" June","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COVID-19 pediatric vaccine authorization, FDA authority, and individual misperception of risk\",\"authors\":\"Joanna K Sax, Neal Doran\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jlb/lsae006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Vaccines are one component to the public health strategies to alleviate the COVID-19 pandemic. Hesitancy regarding COVID-19 vaccines in the United States has been problematic, which is not surprising given increasing overall vaccine hesitancy in recent decades. Most vaccines are administered during childhood years. Consequently, understanding hesitancy toward administration of vaccines in this age group may provide insight into possible interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy. The present study analyzed a subset of over 130,000 public comments posted in response to a notice of meeting of the vaccine advisory group to the Food and Drug Administration. The meeting addressed whether to recommend Emergency Use Authorization (‘EUA’) of the COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5–11. The results of the study demonstrate that most comments opposed EUA and these comments were associated with statements that indicated misperceptions of risk. Findings provide interesting insights regarding the role of public comments generally but also suggest that the public participation process in notice and comment can be modified to serve as an intervention to align individual perceptions of risk more closely with evidence-based assessment of risk. In addition, the findings provide opportunities to consider strategies for public health messaging.\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":\" June\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsae006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsae006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 疫苗是缓解 COVID-19 大流行的公共卫生战略的一个组成部分。在美国,对 COVID-19 疫苗的犹豫不决一直是个问题,这并不奇怪,因为近几十年来,人们对疫苗的整体犹豫不决的态度越来越严重。大多数疫苗都是在儿童时期接种的。因此,了解这一年龄段人群对接种疫苗的犹豫不决可能会为减少疫苗犹豫不决的干预措施提供启示。本研究分析了为响应食品药品管理局疫苗咨询小组会议通知而张贴的 130,000 多条公众意见的子集。会议讨论了是否建议对 5-11 岁儿童使用 COVID-19 疫苗进行紧急使用授权('EUA')。研究结果表明,大多数意见都反对紧急使用授权,而且这些意见都与表明风险认知错误的声明有关。研究结果就公众意见的一般作用提供了有趣的见解,同时也表明,可以对通知和意见中的公众参与过程进行修改,以作为一种干预措施,使个人对风险的认识与基于证据的风险评估更加一致。此外,研究结果还提供了考虑公共卫生信息传播策略的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19 pediatric vaccine authorization, FDA authority, and individual misperception of risk
Abstract Vaccines are one component to the public health strategies to alleviate the COVID-19 pandemic. Hesitancy regarding COVID-19 vaccines in the United States has been problematic, which is not surprising given increasing overall vaccine hesitancy in recent decades. Most vaccines are administered during childhood years. Consequently, understanding hesitancy toward administration of vaccines in this age group may provide insight into possible interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy. The present study analyzed a subset of over 130,000 public comments posted in response to a notice of meeting of the vaccine advisory group to the Food and Drug Administration. The meeting addressed whether to recommend Emergency Use Authorization (‘EUA’) of the COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5–11. The results of the study demonstrate that most comments opposed EUA and these comments were associated with statements that indicated misperceptions of risk. Findings provide interesting insights regarding the role of public comments generally but also suggest that the public participation process in notice and comment can be modified to serve as an intervention to align individual perceptions of risk more closely with evidence-based assessment of risk. In addition, the findings provide opportunities to consider strategies for public health messaging.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊介绍: ACS Applied Bio Materials is an interdisciplinary journal publishing original research covering all aspects of biomaterials and biointerfaces including and beyond the traditional biosensing, biomedical and therapeutic applications. The journal is devoted to reports of new and original experimental and theoretical research of an applied nature that integrates knowledge in the areas of materials, engineering, physics, bioscience, and chemistry into important bio applications. The journal is specifically interested in work that addresses the relationship between structure and function and assesses the stability and degradation of materials under relevant environmental and biological conditions.
期刊最新文献
Correction to "Three in One: In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation of Anticancer Activity of a Theranostic Agent that Combines Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Optical Bioimaging, and Photodynamic Therapy Capabilities". Trastuzumab Conjugation Enhances HER2-Positive Cell Association and Intratumoral Retention of Magnetite Nanoparticles for Magnetic Hyperthermia. Cell Membrane Targeting via Spacer Length-Engineered Amphiphilic DNA Frameworks. Facile Microemulsion Preparation of Paclitaxel-Loaded Silk Fibroin Nanoparticles Using Polyethylene Glycol for Glioblastoma Therapy. Silk Sericin Functionalized with Carboxy Drugs for Dermocosmetic Applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1