Search

Background: We previously conducted a single-profile discrete choice experiment to elicit preferences of adolescents around HPV vaccine communication, finding that only half of participants made variable choices (non-uniform respondents) from which preferences were elicited. In this paper we provide a framework to evaluate post-choice certainty information to elicit preferences even among respondents who uniformly accepted (serial demanders) or refused (serial non-demanders) hypothetical vaccination scenarios. Methods: During an in-class online questionnaire among 1458 French adolescents aged 13–15 years old, we collected certainty levels (0–10) after decisions on nine hypothetical scenarios, including four vaccination attributes: information on vaccine-preventable disease type, on vaccine safety, on potential for indirect protection and on vaccine coverage. We developed a vaccine eagerness scale (ranging from −10 to 10), by combining information on the binary decision (accept vs. refuse the hypothetical vaccine) and the decision certainty level. We used random effects linear regressions to evaluate attributes’ impact on vaccine eagerness. Sensitivity analyses were performed taking into account low response quality, assessed as invariant certainty and low response time. Results: Attributes’ impact on decision certainty were similar between serial demanders (N = 659) and non-uniform respondents (N = 711): mentioning a positive benefit-risk balance significantly decreased certainty to accept (coefficient −0.93), while information on 80% coverage in other countries (+0.33) and potential for disease elimination (+0.09) increased it. Among serial non-demanders, significant attribute impacts were observed only after exclusion of low-quality responses (N = 31): a potential for disease elimination (coefficient: +0.24) and 80% coverage in other countries (+0.42) significantly increased certainty of refusing vaccination. Combining decision and certainty into a vaccine eagerness indicator allowed analysing preferences in the full sample, including “hesitant” respondents, who were sensitive to the content of the vaccination profile. Conclusion: Choice certainty informs on respondents’ preferences in single-profile discrete-choice experiments, in particular among those with uniform responses.

Propose: This study aimed to propose an innovative, open, and circular program that combines acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) and mindfulness practices. We assessed its feasibility, acceptability, and first signs of its effect on psychological wellbeing in cancer support treatment. Methods: A single-center, single-arm, uncontrolled study was performed. Forty adult patients with non-metastatic prostate or breast cancer, newly diagnosed or undergoing treatment (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy), were recruited. Three cycles of three MAEva program sessions (MAEva: Mindfulness meditation, Acceptance, and Commitment to values program) over nine consecutive weeks were proposed. During the total of 12 weeks of follow-up, after attending the first session, patients were free to attend subsequent sessions. Results: Adherence to the study was high, with participation in an average of 6.8 out of nine sessions. A total of eight patients attended all sessions over the three cycles, and 90% participated in at least one cycle. Furthermore, attendance was associated with a statistically significant improvement in Quality of Life (QoL). Each additional session was associated with a mean increase in overall QoL score of more than one point (β = 1.09 [0.13; 2.04], p = 0.02). The fatigue dimensions decreased with session attendance: physical (β = -2.24 [-3.63; -0.85]), emotional (β =-2.60 [-4.11;-1.09]), and interference with daily life (β = -2.33 [-3.95;-0.72]). The qualitative section demonstrated that patients learned skills and shared their ability to "let go". Patients rated the degree of importance of the program at 8.36/10 (SD ± 1.64). Conclusion: This study highlights the feasibility and acceptability of an original program that combines ACT and mindfulness practices in cancer patients. Future studies are required to demonstrate the efficacy of the MAEVA program. TheMAEva pilot study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under the identifier NCT04751201. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objective: Seasonal influenza is frequent among students and often responsible for impaired academic performance and lower levels of general health. However, the vaccination rate in this population is very low. As the seasonal influenza vaccine is not compulsory in France, it is important to improve the vaccination uptake by identifying predictors of both intention and behaviour. This study investigated the effect of decisional balance, motivation and self-efficacy on vaccination acceptance using the Extended Health Belief Model (HBM) and Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Design and Main Outcome Measures University students were invited to fill in an online survey to answer questions about their influenza vaccination intention, and HBM and SDT constructs. A one-year longitudinal follow-up study investigated vaccination behaviour. Results: Autonomous motivation and self-efficacy significantly influenced the intention to have the influenza vaccine, and vaccine behaviour at one-year follow-up. Intention predicted a significant proportion of variation (51%) in behaviour, and mediated the effect of these predictors on vaccination behaviour. Conclusion: These results suggest that motivation concepts of the Self-Determination Theory can be adequately combined with the Health Belief Model to understand vaccination behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]