ArticleSozial- und Praventivmedizin2002
Prevalence of influenza immunisation in Australia and suggestions for future targeting of campaigns.
Article in Sozial- und Praventivmedizin, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- COVID-19 vaccination coverage and vaccine hesitancy among people with opioid use disorder in Barcelona, Spain.Drug and alcohol review · 2022Article
- Public health measures during an anticipated influenza pandemic: Factors influencing willingness to comply.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesReports on the results of a national survey conducted in Australia, in 2000. The objectives were to determine national estimates of influenza vaccination coverage for each state and territory of Australia, to obtain information related to attitudes towards and influences on immunisation decisions and explain the factors involved with failure to immunise.
methodThe survey was conducted using the Computer Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) system. The overall participation rate for the survey was 88.6% and the final number of completed interviews across Australia was n = 10,505.
resultsTwo target groups, those aged 65 years and over and those "at risk" of influenza aged between 40 and 64 years were defined. The overall immunisation rates in these two groups were 74% and 32% resp. The rate of immunisation among females generally exceeded that of males. A multivariate model provided the best joint set of explanatory variables for not getting immunised. These include sex, income, general practitioner recommendation, and general perceptions regarding the influenza injection.
conclusionThis study identified important issues in the decisions of people to immunise. It also highlighted the need to target the findings in effective immunisation policies and strategies to improve health outcomes for those at risk of adverse influenza events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12134738What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.