title: The swine flu vaccine, public attitudes, and researcher interpretations: a systematic review of qualitative research.
abstract: During pandemics, health authorities may be uncertain about the spread and severity of the disease and the effectiveness and safety of available interventions. This was the case during the swine flu (H1N1) pandemic of 2009-2010, and governments were forced to make decisions despite these uncertainties. While many countries chose to implement wide scale vaccination programmes, few accomplished their vaccination goals. Many research studies aiming to explore barriers and facilitators to vaccine uptake have been conducted in the aftermath of the pandemic, including several qualitative studies.
  
  
  
  1. To explore public attitudes to the swine flu vaccine in different countries through a review of qualitative primary studies. 2. To describe and discuss the implications drawn by the primary study authors.
  
  
  
  Systematic review of qualitative research studies, using a broadly comparative cross case-study approach. Study quality was appraised using an adaptation of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) quality assessment tool.
  
  
  
  The review indicates that the public had varying opinions about disease risk and prevalence and had concerns about vaccine safety. Most primary study authors concluded that participants were uninformed, and that more information about the disease and the vaccine would have led to an increase in vaccine uptake. We find these conclusions problematic. We suggest instead that people's questions and concerns were legitimate given the uncertainties of the situation at the time and the fact that the authorities did not have the necessary information to convince the public. Our quality assessment of the included studies points to a lack of reflexivity and a lack of information about study context. We suggest that these study weaknesses are tied to primary study authors' lack of acknowledgement of the uncertainties surrounding the disease and the vaccine.
  
  
  
  While primary study authors suggest that authorities could increase vaccine uptake through increased information, we suggest instead that health authorities should be more transparent in their information and decision-making processes in future pandemic situations.
authors.affiliation: Uni Research Rokkan Centre, Nygaardsgt 112, N-5008, Bergen, Norway. benedicte.carlsen@uni.no.
authors.forename: Benedicte
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Carlsen
authors.affiliation: Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 7004, St. Olavs plass, N-0130, Oslo, Norway.
authors.forename: Claire
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Glenton
mesh_terms: D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D001294:Attitude to Health; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D053118:Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype; D007252:Influenza Vaccines; D007251:Influenza, Human / Q000517:prevention & control*; D008297:Male; D058873:Pandemics / Q000517:prevention & control; D011639:Public Opinion; D036301:Qualitative Research; D012108:Research Personnel; D014611:Vaccination
chemical_list: D007252:Influenza Vaccines
keywords: H1N1; Pandemic; Qualitative research; Reflexivity; Research context; Swine flu; Systematic review; Vaccination