Summary: Researchers report that introducing people who are hesitant about vaccines to someone who has experienced a vaccine-preventable disease can reduce vaccine hesitancy. In a college-based intervention, about 70% of students who interviewed a person with a vaccine-preventable disease moved from vaccine-hesitant to pro-vaccine. Overall, 75% of initially anti-vaccine students increased their vaccine attitude scores, and roughly 50% shifted fully to a pro-vaccine stance.
Source: Brigham Young University
The resurgence of measles, mumps and other formerly rare diseases in the United States has become a serious public health concern. Since Jan. 1, a total of 880 measles cases have been confirmed across 24 states — the largest outbreak since 1994. Measles had been declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000.
Public health officials link these outbreaks to growing numbers of people who opt out of vaccinating themselves or their children. Overcoming vaccine hesitancy — the delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite availability — is a priority for health agencies and governments. Traditional strategies have included public education campaigns and, in some areas, stronger vaccine requirements. New research from Brigham Young University suggests a different and effective approach: familiarizing people with the real-life consequences of vaccine-preventable diseases, rather than relying solely on factual rebuttals of misinformation.
Brian Poole, associate professor of microbiology and molecular biology at BYU, explains the logic: “Vaccines are victims of their own success. They’re so effective that most people have no personal experience with the diseases they prevent. We need to reconnect people with how dangerous those diseases can be.”
Poole and coauthors Jamie Jensen and a team of students tested an intervention among 574 college students in Provo, Utah — a community with high rates of undervaccination among young children. Prior to the intervention, 491 students identified as pro-vaccine and 83 as vaccine-hesitant.
For the study, students were assigned to two interview conditions. One group interviewed someone who had experienced a vaccine-preventable disease (VPD) such as polio, shingles, or tuberculosis. The control group interviewed someone who had an autoimmune condition. At the same time, a subset of students were enrolled in courses that included a concentrated curriculum on immunology and vaccines, while others took courses without vaccine-related content.
Personal stories from the interviews highlighted the physical and emotional toll of VPDs. One student recounted speaking with a congregant who developed severe shingles, describing months of relentless pain that required spinal steroid injections and extensive pain management. Another student interviewed a grandmother who had tuberculosis and reflected that hearing about the suffering made the risk of contracting a preventable disease feel more immediate and real.
Results showed a strong effect from the interview experience. Nearly 70% of students who interviewed someone with a vaccine-preventable disease moved from vaccine-hesitant to pro-vaccine by the study’s end, even without receiving additional vaccine education. Across all vaccine-hesitant participants, 75% raised their vaccine attitude scores, and about half transitioned fully to pro-vaccine attitudes. Those who heard about intense physical suffering or lasting limitations were especially likely to increase their vaccine support.
Additionally, every vaccine-hesitant student who participated in a course with intensive vaccine and VPD curriculum significantly improved their vaccine attitude scores; most of these students became pro-vaccine. The combined effect of personal testimony and targeted education produced the largest attitude shifts.
“If your goal is to affect people’s decisions about vaccines, this process works much better than trying to combat anti-vaccine information,” Poole said. “It shows people that these diseases really are serious, with painful and financial costs, and people need to take them seriously.”
The research team hopes universities, public health agencies, and community organizations will consider adapting similar interventions — facilitating interviews, sharing survivor stories, and offering focused educational modules about vaccine-preventable diseases. The lead author on the paper is graduate student Deborah K. Johnson; the study was published in the journal Vaccines.
Source: Brigham Young University
Media contact: Todd Hollingshead – Brigham Young University
Image source: Public domain
Original research: Open access — “Combating Vaccine Hesitancy with Vaccine-Preventable Disease Familiarization: An Interview and Curriculum Intervention for College Students.” Authors: Deborah K. Johnson, Emily J. Mello, Trent D. Walker, Spencer J. Hood, Jamie L. Jensen and Brian D. Poole. Published in Vaccines. DOI: 10.3390/vaccines7020039
Abstract (condensed)
Vaccine hesitancy ranks among top global health threats. In urban areas with clusters of hesitancy, outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases can resurge. Many vaccine-hesitant individuals lack direct awareness of disease consequences, which may leave them susceptible to misinformation. This study assigned college students in a vaccine-hesitant hotspot to interview someone who had experienced a vaccine-preventable disease or someone with an autoimmune condition, and measured vaccine attitudes before and after. Students who conducted a VPD interview were substantially more likely to become pro-vaccine than those in the autoimmune interview condition. Enrollment in an intensive vaccine curriculum and exposure to accounts of severe physical suffering further increased pro-vaccine attitudes. These findings indicate that personal familiarity with vaccine-preventable diseases can effectively reduce vaccine hesitancy.