Cross-sectional study reveals higher digital vaccine literacy predicts more favorable vaccination attitudes in parents, suggesting critical online evaluation skills promote vaccine acceptance.
Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the connection between parents’ digital vaccine literacy and their attitudes toward vaccination.Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted between February and March 2025 among 433 parents who applied to Family Health Centers in Mehmet Akif Ersoy District, Türkiye. Data were collected using the digital vaccine literacy scale (DVLS), and the attitudes toward vaccination scale (AVS). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 22.0, with a significance level of p<0.05. These analyses included descriptive statistics, an independent t-test, a Kruskal-Wallis test and a simple linear regression analysis.Results: Participants’ mean AVS score was 33.82±9.24, and the mean DVLS score was 19.23±3.76. Digital vaccine literacy differed significantly across age groups (p=0.001) and occupational groups (p<0.001), with the highest scores observed among participants younger than 30 years and among workers/self-employed. No significant differences in digital vaccine literacy were found by gender, education, or marital status. Regression analysis showed that digital vaccine literacy significantly predicted attitudes toward vaccination (B=−0.519, p<0.001), indicating that higher digital vaccine literacy was associated with less negative vaccination attitudes.Conclusion: Digital vaccine literacy was significantly associated with vaccination attitudes. Higher digital vaccine literacy was linked to less negative, and thus more favorable, attitudes toward vaccination. These findings suggest that strengthening parents’ ability to access, understand, and critically evaluate vaccine-related information in digital environments may support more positive vaccination attitudes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
TERKEŞ et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: