ArticleJournal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi2012
Health impact assessment of free immunization program in Jinju City, Korea.
Article in Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Health Impact Assessments of Health Sector Proposals: An Audit and Narrative Synthesis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Epidemiological Impact of the Korean National Immunization Program on Varicella Incidence.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study was conducted to assess the potential health impacts and improve the quality of the free immunization program in Jinju City by maximizing the predicted positive health gains and minimizing the negative health risks.
methodsA steering committee was established in September 2010 to carry out the health impact assessment (HIA) and began the screening and scoping stages. In the appraisal stage, analysis of secondary data, a literature review, case studies, geographic information systems analysis, a questionnaire, and expert consultations were used. The results of the data collection and analyses were discussed during a workshop, after which recommendations were finalized in a written report.
resultsIncreased access to immunization, comprehensive services provided by physicians, the strengthened role of the public health center in increasing immunization rates and services, and the ripple effect to other neighboring communities were identified as potential positive impacts. On the other hand, the program might be inaccessible to rural regions with no private clinics where there are more at-risk children, vaccine management and quality control at the clinics may be poor, and vaccines may be misused. Recommendations to maximize health gains and minimize risks were separately developed for the public health center and private clinics.
conclusionsThe HIA provided an opportunity for stakeholders to comprehensively overview the potential positive and negative impacts of the program before it was implemented. An HIA is a powerful tool that should be used when developing and implementing diverse health-related policies and programs in the community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.