Evidence for autism in folklore?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Autistic Disorder↗
Biomedical subjects
J Leask
Publications and source records attributed to J Leask.
Vaccination and risk communication: summary of a workshop, Arlington Virginia, USA, 5-6 October 2000.
The declining incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases has led to an increased public focus on the issue of vaccine safety. In an environment of increased consumerism, interest in alternative health practices and anti-vaccination lobbying, media reports that call into question the safety of scheduled vaccines can significantly raise parents' concerns. Recent media coverage of a suggested but unproved link between the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autism has highlighted the challenges of providing a consistent and co-ordinated response. For those concerned about effectively communicating the benefits and risks of vaccination, the field of risk communication can provide helpful insights. This paper summarizes the Workshop on Vaccine Communication held in the USA during October 2000. It highlights the perspectives given by consumers, providers, journalists and risk-communication experts and discusses implications for Australia. These centre around how government and health professionals might respond to vaccine safety scares in the public arena, and to parental concerns raised in clinical encounters. Finally, the potential risks and benefits of engaging with the anti-vaccination lobby are outlined.
Australia↗
Antivaccination activists on the world wide web.
AIMS: To determine the likelihood of finding an antivaccination site on the world wide web and to characterise their explicit claims and rhetorical appeals. METHODS: Using "vaccination" and "immunisation", examining the first 10 sites displayed on seven leading search engines. Detailed examination of content of 100 antivaccination sites found on Google. RESULTS: 43% of websites were antivaccination (all of the first 10 on Google). Main rhetorical appeals involve themes of the scientific veracity of antivaccination argument; rapport with parents seeking to protect their children from harm; and alleged collusion between doctors, the pharmaceutical industry, and government to deny vaccine harm. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high probability that parents will encounter elaborate antivaccination material on the world wide web. Factual refutational strategies alone are unlikely to counter the highly rhetorical appeals that shape these sites.
Consumer Advocacy↗
Yes, qualitative methods are often misunderstood.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Bias↗
Focus group composition: a comparison between natural and constructed groups.
OBJECTIVE: To provide insight into the effects of focus group composition. METHOD: In an early phase of an ongoing study of parental reception to messages about childhood immunisation, we conducted four focus groups; two with participants who had never met before (constructed groups) and two with participants who were part of a pre-established first-time mothers' group (natural groups). RESULTS: Marked differences were noted in the group dynamics, depth of interaction and diversity between groups. Discussions with constructed groups were animated, enthusiastic, expressed more divergent views and articulated greater complexities of the topic. Discussions with natural groups were generally flatter and less enthusiastic, displaying a higher level of apparent conformity to conventional wisdom. The need to protect other participants from potentially disturbing information about vaccination was expressed across groups but acted to censor natural groups, where participants knew more of each others' sensitivities. IMPLICATIONS: Insight into the factors contributing to such differences may enhance understanding of the contexts in which constructed groups are more appropriate. The processes of social censorship may be of primary interest to the researcher. However, where it is paramount to elicit a range of opinions about a potentially controversial topic, we suggest that natural groups in the delicate stage of norming be avoided. The peculiarities of each individual research circumstance are best explored in pilot studies.
Adolescent↗
Immunization myths and realities: responding to arguments against immunization.
As vaccination programs continue to successfully control more and more infectious diseases, and the effects of these diseases become less visible, there has been increased focus on adverse events following immunization. Vaccines have been falsely implicated in the causation of a range of conditions, especially those which affect infants and young children, and whose aetiology is unknown, poorly understood or multifactorial. This paper explores some of the common immunization myths that clinicians may face. It is essential that health professionals have access to accurate information and are able to respond appropriately to parental concerns. This involves good communication; listening, empathy and tailoring advice to the specific concerns of the parent. Finally, health professionals need to provide consistent messages based on solid research evidence.
Asthma↗