Vaccination discourses among chiropractors, naturopaths and homeopaths: A qualitative content analysis of academic literature and Canadian organizational webpages

dc.contributor.authorFilice, Eric
dc.contributor.authorDube, Eve
dc.contributor.authorGraham, Janice E.
dc.contributor.authorMacDonald, Noni E.
dc.contributor.authorBettinger, Julie A.
dc.contributor.authorGreyson, Devon
dc.contributor.authorMacDonald, Shannon
dc.contributor.authorDriedger, S. Michelle
dc.contributor.authorKawchuk, Greg
dc.contributor.authorMeyer, Samantha B.
dc.date.accessioned2026-05-06T18:07:39Z
dc.date.available2026-05-06T18:07:39Z
dc.date.issued2020-09-12
dc.description© 2020 Filice et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
dc.description.abstractVaccine hesitancy–the reluctance to receive recommended vaccination because of concerns and doubts about vaccines–is recognized as a significant threat to the success of vaccination programs and has been associated with recent major outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. Moreover, the association between complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use and vaccine hesitancy and/or refusal has been frequently reported in the literature. To date, significant gaps persist in our understanding of contemporary Canadian CAM providers’ beliefs regarding vaccination and how socio-professional influences may shape their vaccine-related attitudes and behaviours. To address the latter gap, the current study aims to explore the content of professional guidelines, recommendations and other discourses among CAM providers as they concern vaccination by analyzing both academic, peer-reviewed literature and Canadian organizational webpages prepared by and/or for practicing chiropractors, naturopaths and homeopaths. In the academic literature, we identified a number of complex and diverging views on vaccination that spanned topics of effectiveness; safety; theoretical, empirical, and ethical soundness; political justifiability; and compatibility with CAM philosophy and professional boundaries. However, in its current state the CAM literature cannot be described in broad strokes as being either pro- or anti-vaccination without considering finer areas of disagreement. Compared to the academic literature, which focuses more on the conceptual and evidentiary basis of vaccination, a greater proportion of vaccine-related content on Canadian CAM organizations’ webpages seems to be dedicated to offering specific directives and prescriptions to providers. Guidelines and standards of practice address a number of issues, including vaccine administration, counsel, education and marketing. As CAM organizations further evolve in Canada and elsewhere as part of a broader “professionalization” initiative, greater attention will need to be directed at their role in shaping providers’ beliefs and practices that both support and undermine vaccine promotion efforts.
dc.description.sponsorshipSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Grant #949088.
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236691
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10012/23230
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherPublic Library of Science
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPLoS ONE; 15(8); e0236691
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectvaccination and immunization
dc.subjectvaccines
dc.subjectchiropractic
dc.subjectdatabase searching
dc.subjectvaccine development
dc.subjectpeer review
dc.subjectmedical risk factors
dc.subjectpublic and occupational health
dc.titleVaccination discourses among chiropractors, naturopaths and homeopaths: A qualitative content analysis of academic literature and Canadian organizational webpages
dc.typeArticle
dcterms.bibliographicCitationFilice E, Dubé E, Graham JE, MacDonald NE, Bettinger JA, Greyson D, et al. (2020) Vaccination discourses among chiropractors, naturopaths and homeopaths: A qualitative content analysis of academic literature and Canadian organizational webpages. PLoS ONE 15(8): e0236691. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236691
uws.contributor.affiliation1Faculty of Health
uws.contributor.affiliation2School of Public Health Sciences
uws.peerReviewStatusReviewed
uws.scholarLevelFaculty
uws.typeOfResourceTexten

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
file (8).pdf
Size:
756.41 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
4.47 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: