Keywords: vaccine hesitancy, vaccine refusal, parental attitudes, qualitative research

Background:

Vaccine-preventable diseases remain among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in childhood. Vaccine opposition and hesitancy have become significant global public health concerns, threatening herd immunity. The aim of this study is to explore the factors influencing parents’ vaccination decisions and to propose solutions that may help address vaccine hesitancy.

Research questions:

What are the factors that influence parents from vaccine hesitancy?

Method:

This study is a qualitative research designed with a phenomenological approach. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty-one parents. Participants were identified using the snowball sampling method, and the diversity of the study was increased by reaching parents from seven different provinces of Türkiye: Ankara, Bursa, Bingöl, Diyarbakır, İstanbul, Kocaeli, and Muş. The interviews were conducted via telephone. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis with the MAXQDA 2024 software. Themes and subthemes were created based on the participants’ statements.

Results:

The data obtained were grouped under several themes, including vaccine ingredients, personal experiences, the concept of natural immunity, distrust in the healthcare system, religious beliefs, and conspiracy theories. A significant number of participants stated that they avoided vaccination due to concerns about the chemical substances in vaccine ingredients, the coercive attitudes of healthcare professionals, and negative information circulating on social media.

Conclusions:

Vaccine hesitancy is a multidimensional phenomenon and arises not only from a lack of knowledge but also from factors based on trust, values, and beliefs. To combat vaccine refusal, it is recommended to strengthen the communication skills of healthcare professionals, ensure transparent information-sharing, collaborate with religious leaders, and disseminate accurate information through social media.

Points for discussion: