"If they tell me to get it, I'll get it. If they don't...": Immunization decision-making processes of immigrant mothers.

OBJECTIVE: To understand information-gathering and decision-making processes of immigrant mothers for scheduled childhood vaccines, vaccination during pregnancy, seasonal flu and pandemic vaccination. METHODS: We conducted 23 qualitative semi-structured interviews with immigrated mothers from Bhutanese refugee, South Asian and Chinese communities. Participants lived in Edmonton, Alberta and had at least one child under eight years old. Using NVivo qualitative software, we generated an inductive coding scheme through content analysis of interview transcripts. RESULTS: Our three main findings on information gathering and use in vaccination decisions were: 1) participants in all three communities passively received immunization information. Most mothers learned about vaccine practices exclusively from health care practitioners during scheduled visits. Social networks were primary sources of information in origin countries but were lost during immigration to Canada; 2) participants demonstrated universal trust in vaccines (i.e., no anti-vaccination sentiment). They were comfortable in receiving vaccines for themselves and their children, regardless of past adverse reactions; 3) participants' recollection of the H1N1 vaccination campaign was almost nil, demonstrating the lack of reach of public health vaccination campaigns to designated priority groups (pregnant women and children) in Alberta. CONCLUSION: Our results highlight the limitations of Alberta's current vaccination communication strategies in reaching immigrant women. When immigrant mothers receive vaccination information, our results indicate they will likely follow recommendations. However, our study shows that current communication strategies are not making this information accessible to immigrant women, which limits their ability to make informed vaccination decisions for themselves and their children.

Role and reality: technology transfer at Canadian universities.

Technology transfer offices (TTOs) play a central role in the knowledge translation and commercialization agenda of Canadian universities. Despite this presumed mandate, there is a disconnect between the expectations of government and research institutions (which view TTOs' primary role as the promotion of profitable commercialization activities) and the reality of what TTOs do. Interviews with professionals at Canadian TTOs have revealed that, at their best, TTOs support the social and academic missions of their institutions by facilitating knowledge mobilization and research relationships with other sectors, including industry; however, this does not always produce obvious or traditional commercial outputs. Thus, the existing metrics used to measure the success of TTOs do not capture this reality and, as such, realignment is needed.

Do the print media "hype" genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers.

BACKGROUND: The public gets most of its information about genetic research from the media. It has been suggested that media representations may involve exaggeration, called "genohype." To examine the accuracy and nature of media coverage of genetic research, we reviewed the reporting of single-gene discoveries and associated technologies in major daily newspapers in Canada, the United States, Great Britain and Australia. METHODS: We used neutral search terms to identify articles about gene discoveries and associated technologies hosted on the Dow Jones Interactive and Canadian NewsDisk databases from January 1995 to June 2001. We compared the contents, claims and conclusions of the scientific journal article with those of the associated newspaper article. Coders subjectively assigned the newspaper articles to 1 of 3 categories: moderately to highly exaggerated claims, slightly exaggerated claims or no exaggerated claims. We used classification tree software to identify the variables that contributed to the assignment of each newspaper article to 1 of the 3 categories: attention structure (positioning in the newspaper and length of the article), authorship, research topic, source of information other than the scientific paper, type and likelihood of risks and benefits, discussion of controversy, valuation tone (positive or negative), framing (e.g., description of research, celebration of progress, report of economic prospects or ethical perspective), technical accuracy (either omissions or errors that changed the description of the methods or interpretation of the results) and use of metaphors. RESULTS: We examined 627 newspaper articles reporting on 111 papers published in 24 scientific and medical journals. Only 11% of the newspaper articles were categorized as having moderately to highly exaggerated claims; the majority were categorized as having no claims (63%) or slightly exaggerated claims (26%). The classification analysis ranked the reporting of risks as the most important variable in determining the categorization of newspaper articles. Only 15% of the newspaper articles and 5% of the scientific journal articles discussed costs or risks, whereas 97% of the newspaper articles and 98% of the scientific journal articles discussed the likelihood of benefits of the research. INTERPRETATION: Our data suggest that the majority of newspaper articles accurately convey the results of and reflect the claims made in scientific journal articles. Our study also highlights an overemphasis on benefits and under-representation of risks in both scientific and newspaper articles. The cause and nature of this trend is uncertain.