[ad_1]
declaration:"Swedes have the lowest confidence in the MPR vaccine of all European countries"(State of confidence in vaccines in the EU 2018, report to the European CommissionOctober 23, 2018)
The news that Sweden was the worst of the class was first published by Sveriges Radio and then titled "Record confidence in measles vaccine in Sweden"And disseminated to several other media, even to us here at SVT News.
But this study has also been criticized by the public health authority and doctor and this criticism has also been published by Sveriges Radio.
Despite this, the numbers in the study were set and as late as they were reported today. in a landmark text in Expressen.
And certainly the numbers are surprising.
The conclusion of the study was that only 56.5% of Swedes participating in the study were in agreement that the MPR vaccine was safe and that 57.1% were d & # 39; agree that it is important that children take the MPR vaccine.
MPR stands for measles, mumps and red dogs and is included in Swedish childhood vaccines.
Countries with much better problems than Sweden
But how does this coincide with the fact that Sweden is one of the few countries in the European Union More than 96% of children receive the vaccine? And how can many countries currently have problems with vaccinated refugees and major measles outbreaks? for example Italy and Romania, far ahead of Sweden in the study?
The authors of the report also draw several far-reaching conclusions based on Swedish figures:
"The results of the survey can show how the concerns of certain groups and regions can affect the general population …" and "Sweden can illustrate how confidence (for the vaccine) can fall quickly in n & rsquo; Any country, even in countries with good immunization coverage and effective vaccination programs. "
Missed the translation
But for those who will read the entire report and will also look at the tables where the answers are reported separately by country, the problems will soon become obvious.
A total of 1031 Swedes answered a series of questions about the seasonal flu vaccine and the MPR vaccine (in English MMR) via an online survey in May this year.
First, we can say that a translation has been translated into the survey because the English abbreviation MMR is used instead of the Swedish MPR. One can also question the use of abbreviations when the MPR vaccine is often called measles vaccine.
On the statement, "I think the MMR vaccine is safe", we can see the following answers:
- Totally agree: 292 people, 28.3%
- Agreement for the essential: 291 people, 28.3%
- Not in agreement for the essential: 55 people, 5.3%
- Not at all agree: 33 people, 3.2%
Of the 671 people who thought something was positive, 583, or 86.89%.
More than a third fell
But now we come to the big problem. In the questionnaire, there is a fifth option, "I do not know" – and the authors of the report also chose to add to this group those who did not respond at all.
In this group, we find 360 people, 35% or more of the one third of the Swedish participants participating in the study. How the distribution between do not know and no answer appears in the group, we can not say, because that is not specifically reported in the report.
The largest absolute group therefore responded that they did not know if they did not respond at all to the statement that the "MMR vaccine" is safe. Nevertheless, these are grouped with the group who responded that they considered that the vaccine was not safe and that it would seem that only half of the Swedes consider that the vaccine was safe.
The same goes for the statement that "it is important for children to take the MMR vaccine", one-third of whom did not answer at all or who answered "not knowing. ".
It will therefore be impossible to draw conclusions from the investigation.
<! –
Sweden is out of stock
The fact that the group that responded does not know or answer at all is so great is also unique to Sweden in the study. The country closest to Belgium is 22.3% and if the average of the 27 countries is reached, it is 11%.
The Régie de la santé publique has also carefully examined the report, which contains several points of view.
-It's been misleading on many levels in this study. Among other things, the translation of the questionnaire itself and how to formulate the questions. But also how to analyze the numbers without conducting a critical self-examination, says Adam Roth, medical specialist and head of the immunization program unit of the Public Health Authority.
Adam Roth adds that it is absolutely impossible to draw conclusions from the data collected by the authors of the study.
-This requires you to redo and ask the question correctly.
He also criticizes cross-country comparisons based on the results of the study.
-I think this is not reliable. Given the number of questions we have on the Swedish results, we should also ask ourselves how good the results in other countries are.
Will redo parts of the study
The Public Health Authority has been in contact with the report's authors and has exposed the problems.
The SVT factor has also been in contact with the lead author of the report, Professor Heidi Larson of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who announced that part of the Swedish study would be revised .
"If we understand, the population may not understand the RRO or the RPM, so we reset the question with the words printed, we should have the results in a few days," she wrote in an email.
Do you have facts that could contribute to the text or other statements of political leaders that you believe should be considered in the SVT summary sheet? [email protected].
sources:
Source link
