378
Views
3
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Major Articles

Predictors of meningococcal vaccine uptake in university and college students: a systematic review and meta-analysis

, MPHORCID Icon, , PhD, , MPH & , PhD
Pages 1738-1753 | Received 22 Feb 2020, Accepted 28 Aug 2020, Published online: 13 Oct 2020
 

Abstract

Objective: To identify predictors of meningococcal vaccine uptake among university and college students, the most common carriers of meningococcal disease. Participants: University or college students aged 18 to 25 years. Methods: Multiple databases, citations, and gray literature were systematically searched in April 2017 and January 2019, for articles reporting rates and predictors of vaccine uptake. Included studies underwent quality appraisal, and, where suitable, meta-analyses were performed. Results: Twenty-one articles, covering 18 studies from six countries, were included. They were mostly cross-sectional surveys of routine vaccination. Meta-analyses were conducted on six predictors. Higher vaccination uptake was associated with being a first year student, an undergraduate student, not being an international student, perceiving meningococcal disease as a risk, and being female. Conclusion: Identified key predictors correspond with previous studies and other vaccines. The findings should inform the delivery and communication of meningococcal vaccination to university and college students.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank both Dr Steven Oliver and Dr Leena Inamdar for their thoughtful comments and feedback. J.W. undertook this research as part of a Master’s in Public Health degree at the University of York, UK.

Conflict of interest disclosure

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report. The authors confirm that the research presented in this article met the ethical guidelines, including adherence to the legal requirements, of the United Kingdom. As the research undertaken was systematic review, ethical approval was not required according to the research ethics committee of the University of York Department of Health Sciences. .

Funding

No funding was used to support this research and/or the preparation of the manuscript.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.