AKADEMİSYENLERDE AŞI KARŞITLIĞININ DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Abstract

Amaç: Toplumun belirli sosyo kültürel düzeyine sahip gruplarından akademisyenlerin aşı konusunda ne düşündüklerinin belirlenmesi amacıyla tanımlayıcı olarak planlanmıştır. Yöntem: Araştırmanın evrenini Sivas Cumhuriyet Üniversitesinde görev yapan akademik personel oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmada Nisan 2021- Mayıs 2021 tarihleri arasında, online form uygulanarak, örneklem seçim yöntemine gidilmeden, araştırmaya katılmaya gönüllü gönüllü 104 personele ulaşılmıştır. Gerekli etik ve resmi izinler alındıktan sonra, veriler sosyo demografik özellikler formu ve aşı karşıtlığı ölçeği kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Bulgular: Akademisyenlerde total aşı karşıtlığı ortalaması 1,99±0,80 dir. Akademisyenler arasında yapılan bu çalışmada aşı karşıtlığı puan ortalamasının düşük olduğu ve akademisyenlerin aşı karşıtı olmadığı belirlenmiş olsa da , Covid-19 sürecine dair aşının etkisi olmadığı ve pandemiyi bitirmeyeceği görüşü anlamlı derecede yüksektir. Sonuç: Aşı reddi fikrine sebep olabilen pek çok faktör olmasına karşın , verilen eğitim ve danışmanlıkların oldukça etkili olduğu yapılan pek çok çalışmada görülmüştür. Bu yüzden, eğitim seviyesi yüksek, eğitime açık olan grup olan akademisyenlerin aşı konusunda yeterince bilinçlendirilmesi oldukça önemlidir

Keywords

• aşı karşıtlığı
• akademisyen
• covid-19

EVALUATION OF ANTI-VACCINTION IN ACADEMICS

Abstract

Purpose: It was planned as a descriptive study in order to determine what academics from certain socio-cultural groups of the society think about vaccines. Method: The population of the research consists of academic staff working at Sivas Cumhuriyet University. In the study, between April 2021 and May 2021, by applying the online form, 104 volunteers who volunteered to participate in the research were reached, without using the sample selection method. After obtaining the necessary ethical and official permissions, data were collected using the socio-demographic characteristics form and the anti-vaccine scale. Results: The mean of total anti-vaccination among academicians was 1.99±0.80. Although it was determined in this study among academics that the mean anti-vaccine score was low and the academics were not anti-vaccine, the opinion that the vaccine has no effect on the Covid-19 process and will not end the pandemic is significantly high. Conclusion: Although there are many factors that can cause the idea of ​​​​vaccination rejection, it has been seen in many studies that the training and counseling provided are quite effective. Therefore, it is very important to raise awareness of the academicians, who are highly educated and open to education, about vaccination.

Keywords

• anti vaccine
• academicians
• covid-19

References

1. Argüt N, Yetim A, Gökçay G. (2016). Factors Affecting Vaccine Acceptance. Children's Journal; 16:16-24
2. Artenstein, AW. Biological Attack. In GR Ciottone (Ed.). (2016). Ciottone's Disaster Medicine; pp. 480-488: Elsevier.
3. Atac O, Aker AA. (2014). Anti-vaccine. Journal of Health Thought and Medical Culture, 30; 42-47
4. Bozkurt H. (2018). An Overview of Vaccine Rejection and Review of the Literature. Kafkas J Med Sci; 8(1):71–76 doi: 10.5505/kjms.2018.12754
5. Damage M, Ozer Z, Bozdemir N . (2021). Reasons for Vaccine Refusal and Opinions on Vaccines. Cukurova Medical Journal; 46(1):166-176
6. Healthy People. Immunization and infectious diseases. (Retrieved: 29.07.2015, http://www.healthypeople. gov/2020/topicsobjectives/topic/immunization-andinfectious-diseases)
7. Karafillakis E, Larson HJ. (2017). ADVANCE consortium The benefit of the doubt or doubts over benefits? A systematic literature review of perceived risks of vaccines in European populations. Vaccine;35(37):4840-50
8. Kearney, A., & Pettit, C. (2016). Introduction to Biological Agents and Pandemics. In GR Ciottone (Ed.), Ciottone's Disaster Medicine; (Vol. 2nd Edition, pp. 696-698): Elsevier.

9. Kutlu H, Altındiş M. (2018). Vaccination Opposition. Flora; 23(2):47-58
10. Plotkin SA, Orenstein WA, Offit PA (Eds). (2013). In Plotkin's Vaccines; Claire Anne Sieglist. Vaccine immunology.; 6th ed; Elsevier Saunders: Pp 16-34.
11. Tercan, B.(2020). Biological Disasters and Covid-19. Journal of Paramedic and Emergency Health Services; 1(1) :41-50
12. Toreci K. (2012). History of vaccines. Badur S, Copper M (editors). Vaccination Book; 1st Edition. Istanbul: Akademi Publishing :1-12.
13. Velipaşaoğlu, S. (2020). Factors Affecting Vaccine Immunity and Response Osmangazi Medical Journal Special Issue of Social Pediatrics;1-5.
14. Yuksel G, Topuzoglu A. ESTUDAM Journal of Public Health 2019 ; 4(2):244-58.
15. WHO, The SAGE Vaccine Hesitancy Working Group. What Influences Vaccine Acceptance: A Model of Determinants of Vaccine Hesitancy. (Date of access: 07/16/2015, http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/ meetings/2013/april/1_Model_analyze_driversofvaccine Confidence_22_March.pdf)
16. WHO. Ten threats to global health in 2019.(cited 2019 April 4): Available from: URL: https://www.who.int/emergencies/ten-threats-to-global-health-in-2019