Validity and reliability study of the vaccine hesitancy scale in Turkish sample
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to test the validity and reliability of the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) developed by Larson for Turkish society due to the limited measures of vaccine hesitancy studies in Turkey. This scale can help advance research and vaccination policy for human well-being.
Methods: Two hundred fourty-six participants completed the first questionnaire in Turkish between September and October 2020. The sample of the study was determined to consider the number of items on the 9-item scale is more than 27 times. The retest was used to test the validity of the scale in the study.
Results: The ratio of the scale to chi-square degrees of freedom is 2.29. This can be considered as a sufficient fit. As a result of the first level Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), the values of the goodness of fit suggested that the two-factor model can be considered compatible with the data. The Cronbach's alpha of the total items of the scale is = .801. Factor 1 which was the ‘lack of confidence’ of Cronbach's alpha was 0.904. Factor 2 that was the ‘risks’ was 0.742. The reliability and validity of the VHS analysis revealed a two-factor structure with construct and criterion validity to detect vaccine hesitancy.
Conclusions: VHS is recommended to be used as a data collection tool in health care services to detect the level of vaccine hesitancy among the public. The adaptation of VHS into the Turkish language can help health care providers and immunization policy makers to improve effective approaches by focusing on the individuals’ confidence in vaccination.
Keywords
References
- 1. Haverkate M, D’Ancona F, Giambi C, Johansen K, Lopalco PL, Cozza V, et al. On behalf of the VENICE project gatekeepers and contact points. Mandatory and Recommended Vaccination in the EU, Iceland and Norway: Results of the VENICE 2010 Survey on the Ways of Implementing National Vaccination Programmes. Euro Surveill 2012;17:20183.
- 2. Bozkurt Bekis H. [An overview of vaccine rejection and review of literature]. Kafkas J Med Sci 2018;8:71-6. [Article in Turkish]
- 3. WHO. Immunization coverage. 2018; URL: https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/immunization-coverage.
- 4. Poland GA, Jacobson RM. The age-old struggle against the antivaccinationists. New Engl J Med 2011;364:97-9.
- 5. Leask J. Should we do battle with antivaccination activists? Public Health Res Pract 2015;25:e2521515.
- 6. Callender D. Vaccine hesitancy: more than a movement. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2016;12:2464-8.
- 7. Dubé E, Gagnon D, Nickels E, Jeram S, Schuster M. Mapping vaccine hesitancy-Country-specific characteristics of a global phenomenon. Vaccine 2014;32:6649-54.
- 8. Dube E, Gagnon D, Ouakki M, Bettinger JA, Guay M, Halperin S, et al. Understanding vaccine hesitancy in Canada: results of a consultation study by the Canadian immunization research network. PLoS One 2016;11:e0156118.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Primary Health Care
Journal Section
Research Article
Publication Date
January 4, 2022
Submission Date
December 19, 2020
Acceptance Date
September 7, 2021
Published in Issue
Year 2022 Volume: 8 Number: 1
Cited By
Do social media epistemological beliefs and health perception impact parents’ vaccine hesitancy? A mediation analysis
Global Health Promotion
https://doi.org/10.1177/17579759241270956Childhood Vaccination and Vaccine Hesitancy: A Comparison Between Türkiye and the signifificance of vaccination
Turkish Journal of Pediatric Disease
https://doi.org/10.12956/tchd.1547693