Survey and focus groups find limited preparedness and role ambiguity in addressing vaccine hesitancy

Doctors and medical students showed limited confidence and training for addressing vaccine hesitancy, while focus-group participants were ambivalent about whether doing so fell within a doctor’s role, according to the published abstract of a survey and qualitative focus-group study. The research examined knowledge, experiences and attitudes toward vaccine communication among 174 survey participants and separately conducted focus groups with practising doctors and final-year medical students.

The survey assessed participants’ knowledge, experiences and attitudes toward vaccine communication. Among respondents, 58.6% described themselves as only slightly prepared to address vaccine hesitancy, 79% said they did not have enough training, and 82% regarded addressing hesitancy as important. Another 60.9% reported encountering vaccine hesitancy monthly or more often. The abstract does not specify the survey participants’ subgroup composition, limiting interpretation of how these percentages relate specifically to practising doctors, medical students or other groups.

Five focus groups included 13 practising doctors—10 general practitioners and three hospital doctors—and five groups included 33 final-year medical students. The researchers used inductive thematic analysis to explore participants’ views of responsibility and communication. Focus-group participants were ambivalent about whether addressing vaccine hesitancy was part of the doctor’s role. Their approaches generally concentrated on giving information, understanding patients or persuading them, but rarely combined all three elements. Participants also expressed frustration when communication was ineffective. The authors said an overly biomedical approach and frustration with unsuccessful communication may be replicated through teaching and learning as the next generation of doctors is trained.

The authors concluded that clearer role definition, better training and systemic support are needed to help doctors undertake opportunistic vaccine conversations. The reported survey and focus-group findings describe confidence, attitudes and perceived roles; they do not establish that any particular educational or communication approach changes vaccination uptake. As the source available here is the abstract, the survey recruitment methods, detailed subgroup composition, statistical analyses and wider representativeness of the focus-group findings cannot be assessed. Accordingly, the qualitative themes characterize the participating doctors and students rather than demonstrating how common those views are across the wider workforce or student population.

Subject of Research: Mixed-methods research on doctors’ and medical students’ preparedness and perceived roles in addressing vaccine hesitancy.

Article Title: “Is it worth our time?” Understanding the educational culture of medical students and educators in addressing vaccine hesitancy

Article References: White, P., Alberti, H., Rowlands, G., Tang, E., & Dubé, È. (2026). “Is it worth our time?” Understanding the educational culture of medical students and educators in addressing vaccine hesitancy. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10424-2

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12909-026-10424-2

Keywords: vaccine hesitancy, medical education, doctor training, vaccine communication, practising doctors, medical students, survey research, focus groups, public health, worth, time, Understanding