OBJECTIVES: To assess the test-retest reliability of the Parent Attitudes about Childhood Vaccines (PACV) questionnaire in Malay language; to determine the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy among parents and its associations with parents' socio-demographic characteristics.
METHODS: Forward and backward translation of PACV in Malay language was carried out. The reliability of the Malay-PACV questionnaire was tested among parents with children. The same questionnaire was used to study vaccine hesitancy among parents in a tertiary hospital in Kuala Lumpur. Information pertaining to socio-demographic characteristics, sources of information regarding vaccination and vaccine hesitancy were collected. Associations between vaccine hesitancy with socio-demographic factors were tested using Multivariable Logistic Regression.
RESULTS: The Spearman correlation coefficient and Cronbach alpha for total PACV was 0.79 (p<0.001) and 0.79 respectively. The intra-class correlation coefficients of the subscales ranged from 0.54 to 0.90 demonstrating fair to excellent reliability. A total of 63 (11.6%) parents were noted to be vaccine hesitant. In the univariate analyses, vaccine hesitancy was associated with unemployed parents, parents who were younger, had fewer children and non-Muslim. In the multivariate model, pregnant mothers expecting their first child were four times more likely to be vaccine hesitant compared to those who already had one or more children (aOR: 3.91, 95% CI: 1.74-8.79) and unemployed parents were also more likely to be vaccine hesitant (aOR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.08-3.59). The internet (65.6%) was the main source of information on vaccination followed by brochures (56.9%).
CONCLUSION: The Malay-PACV questionnaire is reliable to be used. The prevalence of vaccine hesitancy among the multi-ethnic Malaysians was comparable with other populations. Pregnant mothers expecting their first child and unemployed parents were found to be more vaccine hesitant.
METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3, multicentre randomised trial, patients aged 21-80 years with cT3 or cT4 gastric cancer undergoing curative resection were enrolled at 22 centres from South Korea, China, Japan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Patients were randomly assigned to receive surgery and EIPL (EIPL group) or surgery alone (standard surgery group) via a web-based programme in random permuted blocks in varying block sizes of four and six, assuming equal allocation between treatment groups. Randomisation was stratified according to study site and the sequence was generated using a computer program and concealed until the interventions were assigned. After surgery in the EIPL group, peritoneal lavage was done with 1 L of warm (42°C) normal 0·9% saline followed by complete aspiration; this procedure was repeated ten times. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All analyses were done assuming intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02140034.
FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2012, and Aug 3, 2018, 800 patients were randomly assigned to the EIPL group (n=398) or the standard surgery group (n=402). Two patients in the EIPL group and one in the standard surgery group withdrew from the trial immediately after randomisation and were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis. At the third interim analysis on Aug 28, 2019, the predictive probability of overall survival being significantly higher in the EIPL group was less than 0·5%; therefore, the trial was terminated on the basis of futility. With a median follow-up of 2·4 years (IQR 1·5-3·0), the two groups were similar in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio 1·09 [95% CI 0·78-1·52; p=0·62). 3-year overall survival was 77·0% (95% CI 71·4-81·6) for the EIPL group and 76·7% (71·0-81·5) for the standard surgery group. 60 adverse events were reported in the EIPL group and 41 were reported in the standard surgery group. The most common adverse events included anastomotic leak (ten [3%] of 346 patients in the EIPL group vs six [2%] of 362 patients in the standard surgery group), bleeding (six [2%] vs six [2%]), intra-abdominal abscess (four [1%] vs five [1%]), superficial wound infection (seven [2%] vs one [<1%]), and abnormal liver function (six [2%] vs one [<1%]). Ten of the reported adverse events (eight in the EIPL group and two in the standard surgery group) resulted in death.
INTERPRETATION: EIPL and surgery did not have a survival benefit compared with surgery alone and is not recommended for patients undergoing curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
FUNDING: National Medical Research Council, Singapore.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three search engines (Google, Yahoo!, and Bing) were searched. The first 20 consecutive websites from each engine were obtained and checked for eligibility. For the quality of the websites, the Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode), the DISCERN tool, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmarks, and Google PageRank were used for the assessment of the included websites. For readability, an online web tool was used, including well-known analyzing indices [Flesch Kincaid grade level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE)]. The acceptable readability level was set to be ≥80.0 for the FRE and <7 for the FKGL and SMOG. The data were presented in frequencies and percentages.
RESULTS: Out of the 60 screened websites, 14 websites were eligible for analysis. There was only one (7.1%) website that had the HONcode seal. The mean score of all websites based on the DISCERN tool was 29.6 ± 12.1, with no website achieved the high score (≥65). Only one (7.1%) website scored >5 based on Google PageRank. Regarding JAMA benchmarks, all websites achieved a mean score of 2.57 ± 1.1. The mean grade level based on the FKGL was 8.4 ± 6.3. All websites had a score of <7 according to the SMOG index. The mean score of the readability ease index was 90.5 ± 16.4.
CONCLUSION: Most of the dental health information on denture hygiene available on the Arabic websites did not have the required level of quality, regardless of being readable and comprehensible by most of the general people.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Directing the patients to the appropriate websites related to their cases is the responsibility of the dentists.