Children’s participation in vaccine research: parents’ views
Intended for healthcare professionals
A&S Science Previous     Next

Children’s participation in vaccine research: parents’ views

Fabienne Jay Clinical programme manager, Sanofi Pasteur, France, Centre for Clinical Vaccinology & Tropical Medicine, University of Oxford
Tracey Chantler , Centre for Clinical Vaccinology & Tropical Medicine, University of Oxford
Amanda Lees , Centre for Clinical Vaccinology & Tropical Medicine, University of Oxford
Andrew J Pollard Reader in paediatric infection and immunity, Centre for Clinical Vaccinology & Tropical Medicine, University of Oxford

Aim: Vaccine studies that evaluate the persistence of protection following immunisation require subjects to continue participation in a research protocol over many years. As parents’ attitudes and opinions may change over time, and with experience of research, it is important to consider the factors influencing parents’ decision-making about their child’s continued participation in such prolonged vaccine studies.

Method: Parental views about participation of their child in a one-year follow-up vaccine study were explored by means of a self-administered questionnaire. Of the 254 eligible parents, 187 took part (74 per cent).

Results: Parents who provided consent were more likely to agree that having a home visit to take blood was very helpful (p=0.005) and that information obtained during the earlier part of the study influenced their decision to take part in a follow-up study (p<o.ooo1). Parents who did not consent to their child’s participation were more likely to report the presence of personal reasons as a variable influencing their decision (p<0.0001).

Conclusions: The relationship between study staff and parents is the cornerstone for success in performing studies involving vaccines and children. Provision of clear study information (oral and written) and offering the convenience of home visits are important in retaining participants in paediatric vaccine trials.

Nursing Children and Young People. 19, 8, 14-18. doi: 10.7748/paed2007.10.19.8.14.c4460

Peer review

This article has been subject to open peer review

Want to read more?

RCNi-Plus
Already have access? Log in

or

3-month trial offer for £5.25/month

Subscribe today and save 50% on your first three months
RCNi Plus users have full access to the following benefits:
  • Unlimited access to all 10 RCNi Journals
  • RCNi Learning featuring over 175 modules to easily earn CPD time
  • NMC-compliant RCNi Revalidation Portfolio to stay on track with your progress
  • Personalised newsletters tailored to your interests
  • A customisable dashboard with over 200 topics
Subscribe

Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now


Are you a student? Our student subscription has content especially for you.
Find out more