PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - SO Whelan AU - F Moriarty AU - L Lawlor AU - K Gorman AU - J Beamish TI - Vaccine hesitancy and non-vaccination in an Irish paediatric outpatient population AID - 10.1101/2020.10.26.20219964 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.10.26.20219964 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/27/2020.10.26.20219964.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/27/2020.10.26.20219964.full AB - Objective To administer the Parent Attitudes Childhood Vaccines (PACV) questionnaire to assess vaccine hesitancy and its relationship with non-vaccination.Design A cross-sectional study using the 15-item PACV questionnaire, with sociodemographic questions.Setting Outpatient department in a tertiary paediatric hospital, Dublin, Ireland.Participants Parents/caregivers of children attending general paediatric clinics.Main outcome measures PACV score and reported non-vaccination. We assessed sociodemographic factors associated with PACV score and accuracy of the PACV in predicting non-vaccination.Results In total, 436 participants completed the questionnaire. 5.5% of our population reported non-vaccination. HPV and MMR vaccines were the most commonly cited vaccines of concern (11.5% and 6.7% respectively) and autism spectrum disorder was the most commonly side effect of concern (4.3%). Mean PACV score was 26.9 (SD 19.1), with a significant difference between non-vaccinators and vaccinators (53.2 vs 25.3, p<0.001). Safety and efficacy concerns were the major contributor to non-vaccination. 14.4% of our population were vaccine-hesitant using the conventional cut-off score, which increased to 22% when using an optimal cut-off which maximised sensitivity and specificity. The accuracy of the PACV score to identify non-vaccination was good (area under the ROC curve = 0.827) and the optimal cut-off had a high negative predictive value (98.5%).Conclusions PACV identified non-vaccination with high accuracy in our population. It may be useful to screen vaccine hesitant parents who could benefit from interventions to improve uptake.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding received.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:CHI at Temple Street Ethics CommitteeAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData available as per manuscript only.