What is the correlation between children who do not get the MMR vaccine and end up Developing Autism? 1. Describe/ explain in detail the purpose of the research and will it be qualitative or quantitative?

While a significant pool of research spanning the past fifteen years has failed to relate the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine to ASD (autism spectrum disorder), parents as well as other entities continually associate the two. Parents refuse or postpone inoculating their children claiming that inoculation (in general) and the MMR shot (in particular) are ASD- causing factors. Decreased inoculation levels are a public health threat as they reduce individual as well as group immunity, besides being linked to numerous recent measles outbreaks, mostly in the non- inoculated population. Parents with ASD- diagnosed children are potentially especially concerned about the reported relationship between ASD and MMR, in spite of scant evidence indicating this association. Surveys of ASD- diagnosed children’s parents indicate that several of them hold the belief that MMR vaccination was a contributor. A recent autistic- child survey (486 participants) revealed that almost two in five had postponed or refused MMR inoculation among these children’s younger siblings. Moreover, a Canadian research (n=98) on autistic children’s younger siblings revealed younger siblings to be less likely to receive full MMR immunization in comparison to their older, autistic siblings. But statistically significant distinctions have yet to be found with regard to autism diagnosis rates between non- vaccinated and vaccinated children (Jain et al, 2015).

In spite of numerous epidemiological researches failing to connect the MMR shot to autism, the debate on its safety continues. Anti- inoculation websites and companies which portray themselves to be official resources on credible vaccine- related information continually provide prejudiced or unsound MMR- related information. This fuels public concerns pertaining to MMR’s safety, resulting in increased immunization postponement/ refusal rates thereby giving rise to significant risks of measles outbreaks in the US and several European nations. For countering such anti- immunization advocates and promoting increased vaccination acceptance in general, there is a need for evidence- based data on immunization’s risks and benefits. The theory that MMR, being a triple live shot, proves more harmful for the neurodevelopment of children when compared with single measles shots, had emerged previously as well. Still, researchers have failed to provide proofs against MMR vaccination. Though prior researches concentrated on autism and other more advanced ailments, present epidemiological researches seek subtler neurodevelopmental results associated, potentially, with vaccine exposure, which may be detected using psychological tests that are sensitive enough to identify even trivial, subclinical disorders among children. Including a broad array of likely confounders influencing child neurodevelopment, such as maternal age, prenatal lead and mercury exposure, maternal IQ and education, besides other pre- and post- natal elements is also crucial (Mrozek-Budzyn, Kie?tyka, Majewska & Augustyniak, 2013).

In the past few years, Poland presented a great opportunity of conducting MMR safety- related researches as the child population was diversified as regards measles vaccine history. A few infants were MMR- immunized voluntarily (by paying extra money) while some others received only single measles shots in accordance with the country’s mandatory immunization schedule until 2004. The remaining children were evidently not measles- inoculated for various reasons (Mrozek-Budzyn, Kie?tyka, Majewska & Augustyniak, 2013).

This quantitative research aims at examining the theory that exposure to MMR negatively impacts child cognitive development. Further, MMR vaccine exposure will be evaluated compared with single measles shot exposure for ascertaining the likely difference of their safety in terms of cognitive child development.

2. Research question – Explain/ describe the research question, what it will prove or bring to light?

Overwhelming scientific proofs reveal no association exists between autism and vaccines. A majority of individuals are bringing their children in for immunization according to schedule; however, the public risk is real despite only some children remaining unvaccinated. The anti- immunization movement was rendered entirely unreliable in...

Five years later, Andrew Wakefield, the anti- immunization drive’s figurehead and the aforementioned study’s main author was additionally accused of scientific misrepresentation, fraud, and ethical violation, with his practice license revoked in Britain (SABIN VACCINE INSTITUTE, 2017).
After Wakefield’s 1998 research, extensive scientific studies have debunked any relationships between autism and vaccines. In the year 2012, for instance, an examination of ten independent researches that involved over 1.26 million kids discovered no linkage between vaccines (especially MMR) and autism. The examination further revealed no linkage between thimerosal/ mercury and autism (thimerosal is a mercury- based preservative removed, in the year 2001, from child vaccines on account of now- invalidated concerns of its potential damaging effects in children. In the year 2015, a Japanese research once again failed to reveal any linkage between thimerosal/ MMR and autism in spite of increasing thimerosal dosages among some children because of receiving multiple shots over time. A second research conducted in the same year, involving over 95,000 children, also failed to establish a linkage between autism and MMR, even among children regarded as being highly prone to developing autism. Several hundred independent research works performed in the past fifteen years have concluded identically: vaccines are not an autism- causing factor. Considering this massive evidential pool, scientists concur that both vaccines and their ingredients don’t contribute to autism development (SABIN VACCINE INSTITUTE, 2017).

If a ten- year- long pool of erroneous data still influences parental decisions, such inoculation hesitancy sentiments can trickle down to less- developed nations where childhood disease (e.g., measles) outbreaks could have massive disastrous repercussions. Fortunately, many individuals realize the significance of group immunity when it comes to protecting weak or too- young babies yet to be inoculated. A recent policy change by the AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics) permits physicians to deny treatment to children if their parents refuse inoculations. Innumerable concerned parents have been voicing demands that anti- inoculation groups not put their children’s health at risk and that philosophical and religious immunization exemptions be put to an end. The science here is clear- cut: the evidential pool reveals no linkage between autism and vaccines, which have actually served as the greatest life- saving contemporary medical innovation. Hence, vaccine- related exemptions and hesitancy constitute a troublesome trend in America, which the research cannot export or encourage (SABIN VACCINE INSTITUTE, 2017).

3. Research Method – Explain/ describe one or two methods and how would you go about investigating this research? Explain in detail.

A retrospective cohort research design represents an epidemiologic observational research design wherein disease risk is compared in retrospect between unexposed and exposed clusters. Firstly, subjects of cohort researches don’t possess the outcome of interest. Choice of subject is on the basis of his/ her exposure status. Therefore, at baseline or during research commencement, the study will have both exposed and unexposed respondents. Subjects are subsequently followed over a certain period of time for evaluating for outcome- of- interest occurrence. During follow- up, the outcome will be developed by a few exposed subjects whereas the outcome of interest will be developed by a few unexposed ones. In such cohort researches, information is amassed from records. Hence, outcomes have previously emerged. Despite this, the fundamental research design essentially remains the same. Therefore, the researcher commences with variables like exposure at the baseline as well as follow- up stages, followed by measuring follow- up outcome. At times, the direction, whether retrospective or prospective, might not be clear. Both retrospective and prospective information on subjects may be analyzed (Setia, 2016).

A retrospective cohort research would be performed through adopting a large- scale American health plan- related administrative claims database, namely the Optum Research Database, which includes over 34 million persons per annum (commercially insured as well as Medicare recipients). The database encompasses…