Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Lauren Rockliffe is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Lauren Rockliffe.


SSM-Population Health | 2016

A qualitative systematic review of factors influencing parents’ vaccination decision-making in the United Kingdom

Alice S. Forster; Lauren Rockliffe; Amanda J. Chorley; Laura A.V. Marlow; Helen Bedford; Samuel G. Smith; Jo Waller

Background High uptake of vaccinations is crucial for disease prevention. Although overall uptake of childhood immunisations is high in the United Kingdom (UK), pockets of lower uptake remain. Novel systematic methods have not been employed when reviewing the qualitative literature examining parents’ vaccination decisions. Aims We aimed to conduct a qualitative systematic review of studies in the UK to understand factors influencing parental decisions to vaccinate a child. Methods On 12/2/14 we searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, CINAHL plus, Embase, Social Policy and Practice and Web of Science for studies using qualitative methods and reporting reasons why parents in the UK had or had not immunised their child. Participant quotes and authors’ interpretations of qualitative data were extracted from the results of articles. Thematic synthesis was used to develop higher-order themes (conducted in 2015). Results 34 papers were included. Two types of decision-making had been adopted: non-deliberative and deliberative. With non-deliberative decisions parents felt they had no choice, were happy to comply and/or relied on social norms. Deliberative decisions involved weighing up the risks and benefits, considering others’ advice/experiences and social judgement. Emotions affected deliberative decision-making. Trust in information and vaccine stakeholders was integral to all decision-making. Practical issues affected those who intended to vaccinate. Conclusions Parents adopted two different approaches to decision-making about childhood vaccinations. By understanding more about the mechanisms underpinning parents’ vaccination behaviour, in collaboration with vaccine stakeholders, we can better design interventions to enhance informed uptake.


Psycho-oncology | 2017

Exploring human papillomavirus vaccination refusal among ethnic minorities in England: A comparative qualitative study

Alice S. Forster; Lauren Rockliffe; Laura A.V. Marlow; Helen Bedford; Emily McBride; Jo Waller

In England, uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to prevent HPV‐related cancer is lower among girls from ethnic minority backgrounds. We aimed to explore the factors that prevented ethnic minority parents from vaccinating, compared to White British nonvaccinating parents and vaccinating ethnic minority parents.


Pilot and Feasibility Studies | 2017

A protocol for a cluster randomised feasibility study of an adolescent incentive intervention to increase uptake of HPV vaccination among girls

Alice S. Forster; Victoria Cornelius; Lauren Rockliffe; Laura A.V. Marlow; Helen Bedford; Jo Waller

BackgroundUptake of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in the UK is good, but there are pockets of the community who remain unprotected. Immunisation teams usually require written parental consent for a girl to receive the vaccine. Evidence suggests that uptake of the vaccine might be improved by promoting consent form return (if returned, forms are likely to grant consent). Incentivising girls to return consent forms is a promising approach to promoting consent form return. Before testing the efficacy of an incentive intervention in a randomised controlled trial (RCT), we must first establish whether the RCT is feasible. In this randomised feasibility study, we aim to establish the feasibility of conducting a cluster RCT of an adolescent incentive intervention to increase uptake of HPV vaccination.MethodsAt least six schools will be randomised to either an incentive intervention arm or a standard invitation arm. Girls in standard invitation arm schools will receive the usual HPV vaccine programme invitation materials. Girls attending schools in the incentive intervention arm will receive the standard invitation and will also be told that they will receive an incentive if they return their consent form (regardless of whether consent is granted or denied). The incentive is being entered into a prize draw to win a retail voucher. Feasibility objectives include estimating the schools’ and parents’ willingness to participate in the study and be randomised; response rates to questionnaires; the extent of missing data; the girls’ and parents’ attitudes towards the incentive offered; school staff experiences of participating, fidelity to the trial procedures, data on any unintended consequences and the possible mechanisms of action, and proof-of-concept evidence of the effect of the intervention on consent form return rates and uptake of the vaccine. Analysis of feasibility outcomes will primarily be descriptive. Consent form return rates and uptake of the vaccine will be presented by trial arm without comparison.DiscussionIncentivising HPV vaccine consent form return may promote HPV vaccine uptake. This study will provide the evidence needed to establish whether testing this incentive intervention using a RCT design in the future is feasible.Trial registrationISRCTN72136061


British Journal of Cancer | 2017

A cluster randomised feasibility study of an adolescent incentive intervention to increase uptake of HPV vaccination

Alice S. Forster; Cornelius; Lauren Rockliffe; Laura A.V. Marlow; Helen Bedford; Jo Waller

Background:Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is suboptimal among some groups. We aimed to determine the feasibility of undertaking a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of incentives to improve HPV vaccination uptake by increasing consent form return.Methods:An equal-allocation, two-arm cluster RCT design was used. We invited 60 London schools to participate. Those agreeing were randomised to either a standard invitation or incentive intervention arm, in which Year 8 girls had the chance to win a £50 shopping voucher if they returned a vaccination consent form, regardless of whether consent was provided. We collected data on school and parent participation rates and questionnaire response rates. Analyses were descriptive.Results:Six schools completed the trial and only 3% of parents opted out. The response rate was 70% for the girls’ questionnaire and 17% for the parents’. In the intervention arm, 87% of girls returned a consent form compared with 67% in the standard invitation arm. The proportion of girls whose parents gave consent for vaccination was higher in the intervention arm (76%) than the standard invitation arm (61%).Conclusions:An RCT of an incentive intervention is feasible. The intervention may improve vaccination uptake but a fully powered RCT is needed.


International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being | 2018

It’s hard to reach the “hard-to-reach”: the challenges of recruiting people who do not access preventative healthcare services into interview studies

Lauren Rockliffe; Amanda J. Chorley; Laura A.V. Marlow; Alice S. Forster

ABSTRACT In this article, we discuss the challenges faced in recruiting “hard-to-reach” groups for interview studies, specifically those who do not access preventative healthcare services. We do this by reflecting on the varying success of different recruitment methods we have used in two recent studies; one investigating ethnic disparities in human papillomavirus vaccination uptake and another exploring difference in cervical screening non-participation. Engaging new community groups to help with recruitment proved particularly difficult, as did recruiting online. Our most successful recruitment methods included recruiting through community groups with whom we had previously established relationships, recruiting through schools and re-contacting participants who previously completed a related survey. We conclude that successful recruitment is dependent on study awareness and engagement. We urge others to be transparent in reporting recruitment methods in order to benefit the qualitative research community and suggest that details are published as supplementary material alongside qualitative articles in future.


BMJ Open | 2017

Influences on university students’ intention to receive recommended vaccines: a cross-sectional survey

Kate Landowska; Jo Waller; Helen Bedford; Lauren Rockliffe; Alice S. Forster

Objectives To explore predictors of university students’ intention to receive a recommended vaccine and the main sources of vaccine-related information accessed by university students. Setting Participants were recruited from University College London (UK) in summer 2015. Participants 177 university students participated. The majority of participants were female (58%), White (68%) and had no religion (58%). Participants were aged 18 to 42 (mean age=23.6). Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcome measures included vaccine attitude, perceived subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, perceived self-efficacy, past receipt of recommended childhood vaccines, perceived adverse reaction to past vaccination and needle fear. As a secondary outcome sources of vaccine-related information were assessed. Results Students classified as high intenders were more likely to have received all recommended childhood vaccines (OR 3.57; 95% CI 1.21 to 10.59; p=0.022), be less afraid of needles (OR 2.44; 95% CI 1.12 to 5.36; p=0.026) and to have lived in the UK until at least the age of 4 compared with those not living in the UK until at least the age of 4 (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.83; p=0.015) and those who lived both in the UK and elsewhere (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.04 to 4.06; p=0.424). The multivariable model explained 25.5% of variance in intention to receive a recommended vaccine. The internet was the most commonly reported source of vaccination information. Conclusions Findings provide an indication of the factors that may need to be addressed by interventions aiming to increase uptake of recommended vaccines in a university population. Future research is recommended using a prospective cohort design.


Psycho-oncology | 2018

Decision-making about cervical screening in a heterogeneous sample of nonparticipants: A qualitative interview study

Laura A.V. Marlow; Amanda J. Chorley; Lauren Rockliffe; Jo Waller

According to the precaution adoption process model, cervical screening nonparticipants represent a heterogeneous group including those who are unaware of, unengaged with, or undecided about screening, as well as intenders and decliners. We aimed to explore beliefs about cervical screening among these different types of nonparticipant.


Journal of School Nursing | 2018

Factors Affecting Delivery of the HPV Vaccination: A Focus Group Study With NHS School-Aged Vaccination Teams in London

Lauren Rockliffe; Emily McBride; Catherine Heffernan; Alice S. Forster

This study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to delivery of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in schools. Four focus groups were conducted with 28 staff members, from four National Health Service school-aged vaccination (SAV) teams in London. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. School engagement and support, and understanding and education about the vaccination (or conversely, a lack of) were identified as both barriers and facilitators. Limited school and team resources, fear of the vaccination, and poor consent form return were identified as barriers. Explanations for why some girls do not complete the vaccination series were provided. Individualizing approaches used to promote and encourage the vaccination was identified as a facilitating factor. Optimal delivery of the HPV vaccination program is dependent on school engagement and the allocation of time for SAV teams to promote vaccination uptake. Immunization program providers should work with schools to improve understanding and support of the HPV vaccination program.


Health Promotion International | 2018

Using affective judgement to increase physical activity in British adults

Alice S. Forster; Penny Buykx; Neil Martin; Susannah Sadler; Ben Southgate; Lauren Rockliffe; Ian Walker

Summary Mobile phone apps have been shown to increase physical activity (PA), but existing apps fail to target the emotional aspects of PA, which influence whether individuals are active. We developed an app that encourages individuals to focus on the emotional aspects of PA. We aimed to assess the acceptability of this app, and conduct a preliminary evaluation of efficacy. The app was developed in collaboration with users through focus groups. Seven users tested the app over 4 months and provided feedback on acceptability, aesthetics and functionality in a follow-up focus group. Results were summarized descriptively. Before testing the app, participants completed a questionnaire assessing their current PA and psychological antecedents of PA. A second questionnaire was completed at the follow-up focus group. Change scores are reported for each participant and overall. The social and reminder aspects facilitated motivation to be active and many found it easy to integrate into their lives. Most suggested modifications. Small improvements in number of minutes spent walking per week were observed (overall mean change +25 min) and some psychological antecedents of PA (overall mean change for social support for PA +0.14, self-efficacy for PA +0.17, outcome expectations about PA +0.20; all five-point scales), but reductions were seen in other domains. The app was acceptable to users, although developments are required. Testing with a small number of individuals, offering preliminary evidence of efficacy of this app, provides justification for further evaluation on a larger scale.


BMC Public Health | 2018

Assessing the acceptability of incentivising HPV vaccination consent form return as a means of increasing uptake

Lauren Rockliffe; Amanda J. Chorley; Emily McBride; Jo Waller; Alice S. Forster

BackgroundUptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is high overall but there are disparities in uptake, particularly by ethnicity. Incentivising vaccination consent form return is a promising approach to increase vaccination uptake. As part of a randomised feasibility trial we qualitatively assessed the acceptability of increasing uptake of HPV vaccination by incentivising consent form return.MethodsIn the context of a two-arm, cluster randomised feasibility trial, qualitative free-text questionnaire responses were collected from adolescent girls (n = 181) and their parents (n = 61), assessing the acceptability of an incentive intervention to increase HPV vaccination consent form return. In the incentive intervention arm, girls who returned a signed consent form (regardless of whether consent was given or refused), had a 1-in-10 chance of winning a £50 shopping voucher. Telephone interviews were also conducted with members of staff from participating schools (n = 6), assessing the acceptability of the incentive. Data were analysed thematically.ResultsGirls and parents provided a mix of positive, negative and ambivalent responses about the use of the incentive to encourage HPV vaccination consent form return. Both girls and parents held misconceptions about the nature of the incentive, wrongly believing that the incentive was dependent on vaccination receipt rather than consent form return. School staff members also expressed a mix of opinions on the acceptability of the incentive, including perceptions of effectiveness and ethics.ConclusionsThe use of an incentive intervention to encourage the return of HPV vaccination consent forms was found to be moderately acceptable to those receiving and delivering the intervention, although a number of changes are required to improve this. In particular, improving communication about the nature of the incentive to reduce misconceptions is vital. These findings suggest that incentivising consent form return may be an acceptable means of improving HPV vaccination rates, should improvements be made.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry; ISRCTN72136061, 26 September 2016, retrospectively registered.

Collaboration


Dive into the Lauren Rockliffe's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jo Waller

University College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Helen Bedford

University College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Emily McBride

University College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Kate Landowska

University College London

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge