ArticleMilitary medicine2014
Military healthcare providers reporting of adverse events following immunizations to the vaccine adverse event reporting system.
Article in Military medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors associated with serious adverse event following immunization: a real-world analysis of the vaccine adverse event reporting system 2025.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Barriers to healthcare workers reporting adverse events following immunization in Zhejiang province, China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- Adverse events following immunization associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines: A descriptive analysis from VigiAccess.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe studied military health care provider (HCP) practices regarding reporting of adverse events following immunization (AEFI).
methodsA convenience sample of HCP was surveyed to assess familiarity with Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), AEFI they were likely to report, methods used and preferred for reporting, and perceived barriers to reporting. We analyzed factors associated with HCP reporting AEFI to VAERS.
resultsA total of 547 surveys were distributed with 487 completed and returned for an 89% response rate. The percentage of HCP aware of VAERS (54%) varied by occupation. 47% of respondents identified knowledge of at least one AEFI with only 34% of these indicating that they had ever reported to VAERS. More serious events were more likely to be reported. Factors associated with HCP reporting AEFIs in bivariate analysis included HCP familiarity with filing a paper VAERS report, HCP familiarity with filing an electronic VAERS report, HCP familiarity with VAERS, and time spent on immunization tasks. In a multivariable analysis, only HCP familiarity with filing a paper VAERS report was statistically significant (Odds ratio = 115.3; p < 0.001).
conclusionsSpecific educational interventions targeted to military HCP likely to see AEFIs but not currently filing VAERS reports may improve vaccine safety reporting practices.
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.