Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18684316›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2008

A comparison of populations vaccinated in a public service and in a private hospital setting in the same area.

Elisabetta Pandolfi, Maria C Graziani, Roberto Ieraci, Giovanni Cavagni, Alberto E Tozzi

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 83% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elisabetta PandolfiBambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital, Rome, Italy. pandolfi.elisabetta@gmail.com
Maria C Graziani
Roberto Ieraci
Giovanni Cavagni
Alberto E Tozzi
Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImproving immunisation rates in risk groups is one of the main objectives in vaccination strategies. However, achieving high vaccination rates in children with chronic conditions is difficult. Different types of vaccine providers may differently attract high risk children.

aimTo describe the characteristics of two populations of children who attended a private and a public immunisation provider in the same area. Secondarily, to determine if prevalence of patients with underlying diseases by type of provider differs and to study if the choice of different providers influences timeliness in immunisation.

methodsWe performed a cross-sectional study on parents of children 2-36 months of age who attended a private hospital immunisation service or a public immunisation office serving the same metropolitan area of Rome, Italy. Data on personal characteristics and immunisation history were collected through a face to face interview with parents of vaccinees, and compared by type of provider. Prevalence of underlying conditions was compared in the two populations. Timeliness in immunisation and its determinants were analysed through a logistic regression model.

resultsA total of 202 parents of children 2-36 months of age were interviewed; 104 were in the public office, and 98 in the hospital practice. Children immunised in the hospital were more frequently firstborn female children, breast fed for a longer period, with a lower birthweight, and more frequently with a previous hospitalisation. The prevalence of high risk children immunised in the hospital was 9.2 vs 0% in the public service (P = 0.001). Immunisation delay for due vaccines was higher in the hospital practice than in the public service (DTP, polio, HBV, and Hib: 39.8% vs 22.1%; P = 0.005). Anyway multivariate analyses did not reveal differences in timeliness between the public and private hospital settings.

conclusionChildren with underlying diseases or a low birthweight were more frequently immunised in the hospital. This finding suggests that offering immunisations in a hospital setting may facilitate vaccination uptake in high risk groups. An integration between public and hospital practices and an effort to improve communication on vaccines to parents, may significantly increase immunisation rates in high risk groups and in the general population, and prevent immunisation delays.

Indexed as

Child, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHospitals, PediatricHospitals, PrivateHumansImmunization ProgramsInfantLogistic ModelsMaleParentsPrevalencePrivate SectorRisk FactorsRomeSocial Class

Identifiers

PMID18684316
PMCPMC2531109
OpenAlexW2062495965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.