Vaccine confidence, public understanding and probity: time for a shift in focus?
Vaccine confidence, public understanding and probity: time for a shift in focus?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/medethics-2020-106805
复制
发表时间：
2021-03-09
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Ives, Jonathan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wheelock, Ana;Ives, Jonathan
缺乏疫苗信心可能导致疫苗接种率下降以及随后麻疹和脊髓灰质炎等疾病的爆发。对疫苗的低信任度归因于一系列因素，包括缺乏理解、疫苗恐慌、政策缺陷、社交媒体以及对疫苗制造商、科学家和决策者的不信任。新冠肺炎危机暴露了社会对新病原体的脆弱性，以及疫苗(及其可接受性)在遏制当前和未来大流行方面的关键作用。它还把科学放在了应对措施的前沿，几个国家的政府依赖学者来帮助制定政策并与公众沟通。在这种背景下，保护公众对科学家和科学成果的信任可以说比以往任何时候都更加重要。然而，生物医学研究中的利益冲突(COI)仍然无处不在且有害，遏制它们的措施收效甚微。也有证据表明，行业赞助的疫苗研究存在偏见，学者们对在COI流行的研究领域工作的风险表示担忧。在这里，我们开始挑战关于疫苗信心的既定思维，将目光从公众理解的缺失转向研究关系中的诚实，并建议一种替代的、或许是补充的战略来解决疫苗不信任问题。我们认为，需要做出协调一致的努力，重新审视支撑当代疫苗研究的规范，同时所有利益攸关方都愿意重新设想这些关系，重点是展示可信度和正直。
Lack of vaccine confidence can contribute to drops in vaccination coverage and subsequent outbreaks of diseases like measles and polio. Low trust in vaccines is attributed to a combination of factors, including lack of understanding, vaccine scares, flawed policies, social media and mistrust of vaccine manufacturers, scientists and decision-makers. The COVID-19 crisis has laid bare societies' vulnerability to new pathogens and the critical role of vaccines (and their acceptability) in containing this and future pandemics. It has also put science at the forefront of the response, with several governments relying on academics to help shape policy and communicate with the public. Against this backdrop, protecting public trust in scientists and scientific output is arguably more important than ever. Yet, conflicts of interest (CoI) in biomedical research remain ubiquitous and harmful, and measures to curb them have had limited success. There is also evidence of bias in industry-sponsored vaccine studies and academics are voicing concerns about the risks of working in a CoI prevalent research area. Here, we set out to challenge established thinking with regard to vaccine confidence, by shifting the gaze from a deficit in public understanding towards probity in research relationships and suggesting an alternative and perhaps complementary strategy for addressing vaccine mistrust. We argue that a concerted effort needs to be made to revisit the norms that undergird contemporary vaccine research, coupled with a willingness of all stakeholders to reimagine those relationships with an emphasis on demonstrating trustworthiness and probity.