title: Vaccine message framing and parents' intent to immunize their infants for MMR.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Emphasizing societal benefits of vaccines has been linked to increased vaccination intentions in adults. It is unclear if this pattern holds for parents deciding whether to vaccinate their children. The objective was to determine whether emphasizing the benefits of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination directly to the vaccine recipient or to society differentially impacts parents' vaccine intentions for their infants.
  
  
  METHODS
  In a national online survey, parents (N = 802) of infants <12 months old were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 4 MMR vaccine messages: (1) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vaccine Information Statement (VIS), (2) VIS and information emphasizing the MMR vaccine's benefits to the child, (3) VIS and information emphasizing societal benefits, or (4) VIS and information emphasizing benefits both to the child and society. Parents reported their likelihood of vaccinating their infants for MMR on a response scale of 0 (extremely unlikely) to 100 (extremely likely).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Compared with the VIS-only group (mean intention = 86.3), parents reported increased vaccine intentions for their infants when receiving additional information emphasizing the MMR vaccine's benefits either directly to the child (mean intention = 91.6, P = .01) or to both the child and society (mean intention = 90.8, P = .03). Emphasizing the MMR vaccine's benefits only to society did not increase intentions (mean intention = 86.4, P = .97).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  We did not see increases in parents' MMR vaccine intentions for their infants when societal benefits were emphasized without mention of benefits directly to the child. This finding suggests that providers should emphasize benefits directly to the child. Mentioning societal benefits seems to neither add value to, nor interfere with, information highlighting benefits directly to the child.
authors.affiliation: Departments of Pediatrics, and Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Indianapolis, Indiana; and kshendri@iu.edu.
authors.forename: Kristin S
authors.initials: KS
authors.lastname: Hendrix
authors.affiliation: Departments of Pediatrics, and Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Indianapolis, Indiana; and Ryan White Center for Pediatric Infectious Disease, Riley Hospital for Children, Indianapolis, Indiana.
authors.forename: S Maria E
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Finnell
authors.affiliation: Departments of Pediatrics, and.
authors.forename: Gregory D
authors.initials: GD
authors.lastname: Zimet
authors.affiliation: Departments of Pediatrics, and.
authors.forename: Lynne A
authors.initials: LA
authors.lastname: Sturm
authors.affiliation: Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana;
authors.forename: Kathleen A
authors.initials: KA
authors.lastname: Lane
authors.affiliation: Departments of Pediatrics, and Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Indianapolis, Indiana; and.
authors.forename: Stephen M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Downs
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D003625:Data Collection / Q000379:methods / Q000639:trends; D005260:Female; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D022542:Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D008875:Middle Aged; D010342:Patient Acceptance of Health Care / Q000523:psychology*; D010865:Pilot Projects; D014611:Vaccination / Q000523:psychology*; D055815:Young Adult
chemical_list: D022542:Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine
keywords: MMR; attitudes; communication; decision-making; herd immunity; messaging; vaccination; vaccines