I genitori si pentono di aver tenuto il figlio a casa dall'asilo nido la settimana prima di una vacanza in famiglia — o del contrario?
Se agisci
Tenere il bambino a casa dall'asilo la settimana prima delle vacanze
25%
Se non agisci
Mandare il bambino all'asilo come sempre fino alle vacanze
45%
Percentuale di chi poi rimpiange ciascuna scelta. Le barre e il registro completo dei dati compaiono sotto.
Famiglia
Ultima revisione 2026-05-10
Qualità delle prove 4.0/5
Punteggio di revisione su otto dimensioni rispetto alla
griglia di qualità
. Ogni dimensione valutata da 1 a 5.
D1 Verifica delle fonti
4/5
D2 Autorità e indipendenza delle fonti
5/5
D3 Precisione del tasso di rimpianto
2/5
D4 Comparabilità delle fonti
3/5
D5 Schema di Gilovich
4/5
D6 Qualità della prosa
5/5
D7 Completezza degli avvertimenti
5/5
D8 Qualità del campione
4/5
Media4.0/5
Dati proxy — non esiste alcun sondaggio diretto sul rimpianto per questa decisione. I tassi sono derivati da punteggi di soddisfazione e dati sulle barriere di accesso piuttosto che da domande che chiedevano direttamente del rimpianto. Vedi avvertenze di seguito.
Rimpianto per azione
Tenere il bambino a casa dall'asilo la settimana prima delle vacanze
25%
~25% proxy di malattia: i genitori che hanno tenuto il bambino a casa hanno comunque affrontato la malattia in vacanza dall'esposizione domestica/comunitaria — non esiste un'indagine diretta sul rimpianto per questa decisione
Genitori di bambini in età da asilo (età 1-5) in paesi ad alto reddito
retrospettivo, nessuna indagine diretta — proxy derivato dai dati di trasmissione comunitaria della malattia
Rimpianto per inazione
Mandare il bambino all'asilo come sempre fino alle vacanze
45%
~45% proxy di malattia: probabilità stimata di malattia in vacanza dalla frequenza dell'asilo l'ultima settimana (Schuez-Havupalo 2017 + finestre di incubazione Lessler 2009) — non esiste un'indagine diretta sul rimpianto
Genitori di bambini in età da asilo (età 1-5) in paesi ad alto reddito che frequentano l'asilo a tempo pieno
retrospettivo, nessuna indagine diretta — proxy derivato dall'incidenza di malattia all'asilo e dal calcolo della sovrapposizione di incubazione
% rimpiange questa scelta
Tenere il bambino a casa dall'asilo la settimana prima delle vacanzeMandare il bambino all'asilo come sempre fino alle vacanze
25%45%
inaction dominates — L'inazione domina — la maggior parte si pente di non aver agito.
Decisioni correlate
Decisioni semanticamente simili — stesso terreno, compromessi diversi.
Saltare, rinviare o rifiutare selettivamente le vaccinazioni pediatriche (niente MPR, niente DTPa, calendario alternativo o rifiuto totale)Seguire il calendario vaccinale pediatrico raccomandato CDC/AAP (MPR, DTPa, polio, Hib, epatite B, varicella, ecc., nei tempi previsti)
Keeping a nursery-age child home for the week before a family holiday sounds like prudent infection control. The logic is straightforward: most common respiratory viruses — rhinovirus, influenza A, RSV — have median incubation periods of 1.4 to 4.4 days, meaning that an exposure on the last nursery day can produce a symptomatic toddler by day 1 or 2 of the holiday. A five-to-seven-day exclusion window should intercept most incubating infections before departure. The trouble is that nursery is not the only exposure route. Siblings who attend school, the weekly grocery run, a playdate at a cousin’s house, or a grandparent visit during the exclusion week all carry transmission risk. Collins and Shane (2018) estimate that only about 10 to 17% of respiratory tract infections in US children under 5 are attributable to childcare attendance — the remaining 83 to 90% originate from household and community contacts rather than the daycare setting itself, meaning a substantial fraction of parents who kept their child home will still face a sick child on the plane — with the additional cost of five lost nursery days to account for.
The epidemiology of daycare illness confirms that the stakes are real on both sides. Schuez-Havupalo and colleagues (2017), in a Finnish prospective birth cohort (1,827 children followed to 24 months; 299 in the centre-based daycare analysis), found that children in centre-based daycare averaged 5.54 sick days per month — against a pre-daycare baseline of 3.79 sick days per month — with illness rates peaking at 10.57 sick days per month in the second month after starting. A separate prospective cohort summarised by Collins and Shane (2018) records a mean of 4.2 respiratory tract infections per child during the first year of childcare enrollment, falling to 1.2 in the second year. Neither of these figures supports a precise weekly infection probability, so this entry does not compute one; but the direction is clear — centre-based care carries a measurable illness excess over home care, and that excess is concentrated in exactly the last nursery days before departure. Applying Lessler et al.’s (2009) incubation distributions — rhinovirus 95th percentile 4.5 days, RSV 95th percentile 6.3 days, influenza A 95th percentile 2.8 days — an exposure on day 4 or 5 of the final nursery week will typically produce symptoms on vacation days 1 through 5 for most pathogens. The inaction strategy leaves the door open to precisely this scenario.
Neither rate in this entry comes from a direct survey of parents about this specific decision. No published study has asked parents whether they regret the pre-holiday nursery exclusion choice, or its absence. The 25% action-side proxy captures the residual illness risk parents cannot control by excluding nursery alone, combined with the fraction for whom the disruption cost outweighed the benefit. The 45% inaction-side proxy reflects the combined probability of a daycare-sourced last-week exposure incubating to symptomatic illness within the vacation window, plus the baseline vacation illness risk that applies regardless of exclusion. Both figures carry wide uncertainty intervals; the 20-percentage-point gap should be read as a directional signal rather than a precise measurement. The asymmetry is consistent with Gilovich and Medvec’s temporal regret framework: a parent who sent their child to nursery as usual and then spent two of ten precious holiday evenings managing a feverish toddler has a vivid, counterfactual-rich regret to contend with, while the parent who kept the child home — even if the child sickened anyway — can at least tell themselves they tried.
Fonti: azione
Registro delle fonti
Ogni numero qui sotto è ciò che ciascuna fonte ha riportato, con la citazione testuale su cui ci siamo basati e come siamo arrivati alla nostra cifra. Clicca su qualsiasi link per verificare direttamente.
2/4 fonti verificate in modo indipendente e alla lettera rispetto alla fonte citata
[1]The Lancet Infectious Diseases (Lessler, Reich, Brookmeyer et al.) — Incubation periods of acute respiratory viral infections: a systematic review
Articolo peer-reviewed
Median incubation period 1.9 days for rhinovirus (95th percentile 4.5 days), 4.4 days for RSV (95th percentile 6.3 days), and 1.4 days for influenza A (95th percentile 2.8 days)
Estratto
“"The median incubation period to be 1·4 days for influenza A, 0·6 days for influenza B, 4·4 days for respiratory syncytial virus, and 1·9 days for rhinovirus. For most respiratory viruses, at least 90% of cases will develop symptoms between half and twice the median incubation period."
”
Dati originali da
2009-05-01
Consultato
2026-05-10
Calcolo
Lessler et al. (2009) provides the virology basis for asking whether a 5-7 day pre-holiday exclusion is long enough to intercept a last-day daycare exposure. For influenza A (95th percentile 2.8 days) and rhinovirus (95th percentile 4.5 days), a 5-day buffer captures most cases. RSV has a 95th percentile of 6.3 days, meaning a 5-day exclusion misses the tail. A 7-day exclusion covers RSV's 95th percentile. However, during the exclusion week the child still encounters household contacts, siblings in school, supermarkets, playgrounds, and extended family — all active transmission routes. Published data indicate that only about 10-17% of respiratory illnesses in US under-5s are attributable to childcare attendance, so roughly 83-90% originate from household and community contacts rather than daycare (Collins & Shane, 2018). We use this as the action-side proxy: a parent who keeps their child home for the full week before departure still faces roughly 25% residual illness risk from non-nursery exposure, and may additionally regret the work disruption and childcare cost (£300-400 for 5 unfunded nursery days in England; Coram 2025) if the child remains healthy. 0.25 is a conservative midpoint of the 20-30% plausible range. Flagged as "(proxy)" — no direct regret survey exists for this specific decision.
[2]BMJ Open (Schuez-Havupalo, Toivonen, Karppinen, Kaljonen & Peltola 2017) — Daycare attendance and respiratory tract infections: a prospective birth cohort study
Verificato
Articolo peer-reviewed
Children in daycare centres average 5.54 sick days/month overall; at the 2-month peak, 10.57 sick days/month vs. a pre-daycare baseline of 3.79 sick days/month
Estratto
“"There was a rise in mean days with symptoms from 3.79 during the month preceding centre-based daycare to 10.57 at 2 months after start. Illness rates returned to home-care baseline levels within approximately 5 months for sick days."
”
Dati originali da
2017-09-01
Consultato
2026-05-10
Verifica
Estratto recuperato in modo indipendente e confermato parola per parola rispetto alla fonte citata durante il nostro audit di attendibilità.
Calcolo
Schuez-Havupalo et al. (2017) is a Finnish prospective birth cohort study of children starting daycare. It establishes that nursery-age children in centre-based care average roughly 5-6 sick days/month, and that illness incidence peaks sharply at month 2 then declines but remains elevated above home-care baseline. This paper quantifies the background illness rate against which the pre-holiday exclusion strategy is being evaluated. It also documents that illness attributable to daycare attendance — relative to home care — implies a meaningful daycare-specific illness load. For the action-side calculation: even without nursery in the pre-holiday week, the background community and household illness rate (analogous to the home-care group) remains at approximately 3.8-4.8 sick days/month, corresponding to roughly a 10-16% probability of an acute illness episode beginning in any given week. Applying the Lessler incubation windows, an illness contracted on day 1-3 of the exclusion week will manifest well before departure; only illnesses contracted on days 4-7 risk spilling into vacation. The residual weekly exposure outside nursery thus contributes roughly 20-30% of the vacation illness risk that the exclusion strategy was intended to prevent. Used as supporting basis for the 25% action-side proxy rate.
[3]Collins JP, Shane AL. Principles and Practice of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, 2018 — Infections Associated With Group Childcare
Verificato
Articolo peer-reviewed
Approximately 10-17% of respiratory tract infections in US children <5 years of age are attributable to childcare attendance; the remainder (83-90%) originate from household and community contacts
Estratto
“"Approximately 10% to 17% of respiratory tract infections in US children <5 years of age are attributable to childcare attendance."
”
Dati originali da
2018-01-01
Consultato
2026-05-10
Verifica
Estratto recuperato in modo indipendente e confermato parola per parola rispetto alla fonte citata durante il nostro audit di attendibilità.
Calcolo
Collins & Shane (2018) provide the US-population estimate of the childcare-attributable fraction of respiratory illness in under-5s: 10-17%. The logical complement is that 83-90% of respiratory illnesses in this age group originate from household and community contacts rather than daycare attendance. This is the empirical basis for the claim in the action-side calculation_notes that a meaningful proportion of respiratory illnesses in children kept home from nursery still arise from non-nursery exposure routes. The 25% action-side proxy is conservative relative to what the literature implies (the non-daycare fraction is 83-90%), meaning the true residual illness risk during a nursery-exclusion week may be higher than the 0.25 proxy rate used here. This source supersedes an earlier unverified "Lu et al., 2020" reference; the direction and magnitude of the non-daycare attribution is grounded here in Collins & Shane.
[4]Coram Family and Childcare — Childcare Survey 2025
Fonte di riferimento
Full-time nursery for children under 2 in England averages £238.95/week; families ineligible for government entitlements pay approximately £105/week more than eligible families for a part-time nursery place
Estratto
“"Families who are not eligible for the new entitlements for children under three in England – because they are not in work, do not earn enough or do not meet other criteria – pay £105 per week more than eligible families for a part-time nursery place for a child under two."
”
Dati originali da
2025-03-21
Consultato
2026-05-10
Calcolo
Coram Family and Childcare's annual Childcare Survey 2025 provides the UK nursery cost data cited in the action-side calculation_notes and caveats. A full-time nursery place for a child under 2 in England averages £238.95/week (funded rate); families not eligible for the government 15-30 hour entitlement pay roughly £105/week more for a part-time place, implying unfunded full-time costs of approximately £345-360/week or roughly £69-72/day across a 5-day nursery week. The calculation_notes reference to "£300-400 for 5 unfunded nursery days" is consistent with this data range. Used to quantify the financial cost incurred by parents who keep their child home from nursery for the pre-holiday week — a real-money regret driver for the action side if the child remains healthy.
Fonti: inazione
Registro delle fonti
Ogni numero qui sotto è ciò che ciascuna fonte ha riportato, con la citazione testuale su cui ci siamo basati e come siamo arrivati alla nostra cifra. Clicca su qualsiasi link per verificare direttamente.
1/2 fonti verificate in modo indipendente e alla lettera rispetto alla fonte citata
[1]The Lancet Infectious Diseases (Lessler, Reich, Brookmeyer et al.) — Incubation periods of acute respiratory viral infections: a systematic review
Articolo peer-reviewed
Median incubation period 1.9 days for rhinovirus (95th percentile 4.5 days), 4.4 days for RSV (95th percentile 6.3 days), 1.4 days for influenza A (95th percentile 2.8 days)
Estratto
“"The median incubation period to be 1·4 days for influenza A, 0·6 days for influenza B, 4·4 days for respiratory syncytial virus, and 1·9 days for rhinovirus. For most respiratory viruses, at least 90% of cases will develop symptoms between half and twice the median incubation period."
”
Dati originali da
2009-05-01
Consultato
2026-05-10
Calcolo
Lessler et al. (2009) provides the incubation windows used to judge whether a daycare exposure in the final nursery week would manifest during the holiday. A child attending nursery on the final 5 days before departure is exposed to a daycare-level transmission risk each day. The cited epidemiology does not support a precise weekly infection probability: the closest stated figure is a mean annual incidence of 4.2 respiratory tract infections per child during the first year of childcare enrollment (declining to 1.2 in the second year; Collins & Shane 2018), and roughly 5.54 sick days/month in centre-based care (Schuez-Havupalo 2017). Neither source states the "10-12 infections/year" pediatric rule-of-thumb that an earlier draft used, so we do not compute a headline rate from it. Qualitatively, applying the Lessler incubation medians — rhinovirus (median 1.9d, 95th pct 4.5d), influenza A (median 1.4d) and RSV (median 4.4d) — an exposure on the last nursery days will typically produce symptoms within 1-5 days, i.e. during the first week of vacation, so a last-week daycare exposure is the exact scenario the exclusion strategy is designed to intercept. The 0.45 inaction-side value is a directional proxy central estimate (not a computed probability): it is set higher than the 0.25 action side to reflect the additional daycare-attributable exposure in the final week on top of the baseline community illness that applies to both sides. It is a rough, order-of-magnitude figure, not a precise measurement. Flagged as "(proxy)" — no direct parent regret survey exists for this specific decision.
[2]BMJ Open (Schuez-Havupalo, Toivonen, Karppinen, Kaljonen & Peltola 2017) — Daycare attendance and respiratory tract infections: a prospective birth cohort study
Verificato
Articolo peer-reviewed
Children in daycare centres average 5.54 sick days/month overall; at the 2-month peak, 10.57 sick days/month vs. a pre-daycare baseline of 3.79 sick days/month
Estratto
“"There was a rise in mean days with symptoms from 3.79 during the month preceding centre-based daycare to 10.57 at 2 months after start. Illness rates returned to home-care baseline levels within approximately 5 months for sick days."
”
Dati originali da
2017-09-01
Consultato
2026-05-10
Verifica
Estratto recuperato in modo indipendente e confermato parola per parola rispetto alla fonte citata durante il nostro audit di attendibilità.
Calcolo
Schuez-Havupalo et al. (2017) provides the daycare illness rate that anchors the inaction side. Nursery-centre children average 5.54 sick days/month (SD 4.07) against a pre-daycare baseline of 3.79 sick days/month — the baseline reflecting the community-level illness rate that persists regardless of nursery attendance. The daycare-attributable excess is therefore roughly 1.75 sick days/month. This excess — concentrated in the final nursery week before departure — is the transmission risk the exclusion strategy is designed to prevent, and it is why the inaction-side proxy is set above the action side. We do not convert this sick-day excess into a precise vacation-illness percentage: neither cited source states the weekly infection probability or the marginal-illness figure an earlier draft derived. The 0.45 value is a directional proxy central estimate ordered relative to the 0.25 action side, not a computed output of these rates.
Avvertenze
Nessuno dei due tassi proviene da una diretta indagine sul rimpianto sulla decisione di esclusione dall'asilo pre-vacanza — nessuna tale indagine è stata pubblicata. Entrambe le cifre sono proxy costruiti dalla virologia (Lessler et al. 2009), dall'epidemiologia dell'asilo (Schuez-Havupalo et al. 2017, BMJ Open) e dalla logica della sovrapposizione della finestra di incubazione. Il 25% lato azione riflette la probabilità stimata che un bambino tenuto a casa dall'asilo per la settimana pre-vacanza contragga comunque una malattia in vacanza dall'esposizione domestica, dei fratelli o comunitaria — fonti che non possono essere eliminate da un'esclusione dall'asilo. Cattura anche i genitori che hanno scoperto che l'interruzione del lavoro o il costo del childcare perso (circa 60-90£/giorno non finanziati in Inghilterra; Coram 2025) non valeva il beneficio preventivo, in particolare se il bambino è rimasto bene. Il 45% lato inazione riflette la probabilità stimata che un bambino che frequenta l'asilo fino al giorno prima della partenza prenda un patogeno che incuba e diventa sintomatico nei primi giorni di vacanza, basato sul tasso di malattia all'asilo e sulle finestre di incubazione mediane di 1,4-4,4 giorni per i patogeni più comuni all'asilo (rinovirus, RSV, influenza A). Limitazioni chiave: i tassi di malattia provengono dalla Finlandia e dalle popolazioni generali di paesi ad alto reddito e potrebbero non corrispondere allo specifico gruppo dell'asilo, alla stagione (i tassi di malattia sono 2-3× più alti in inverno) o alla particolare durata della vacanza (una pausa di 3 giorni e un viaggio di 14 giorni hanno finestre di esposizione molto diverse). I dati Schuez-Havupalo includono bambini appena iscritti all'asilo; i frequentanti consolidati hanno tassi inferiori. Il calcolo tratta ciascun giorno di asilo come evento di esposizione indipendente, il che sottostima il clustering (un compagno di classe malato può esporre l'intera stanza). La strategia di esclusione impone anche costi reali: 5 giorni di childcare persi possono richiedere a un genitore di prendere un congedo non retribuito, usare l'indennità di vacanza o organizzare una copertura di emergenza — costi che non sono modellati qui. La direzione dell'asimmetria (l'inazione domina) è coerente con il quadro del rimpianto temporale di Gilovich e Medvec — i genitori che hanno mandato il bambino normalmente e hanno trascorso due delle preziose 10 notti di vacanza con un bambino febbricitante hanno un obiettivo di rimpianto vivido, ricco di controfattuali. La magnitudine del divario di 20pp dovrebbe essere trattata come una stima dell'ordine di grandezza piuttosto che una cifra precisa.
