Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26593061›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2015

Surveillance of antenatal influenza vaccination: validity of current systems and recommendations for improvement.

Annette K Regan, Donna B Mak, Hannah C Moore, Lauren Tracey, Richard Saker, Catherine Jones, Paul V Effler

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. 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

7 authors.

Annette K ReganSchool of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia. Annette.Regan@health.wa.gov.au.
Donna B MakWestern Australia Department of Health, Communicable Disease Control Directorate, Shenton Park, WA, 6008, Australia. Donna.Mak@health.wa.gov.au.
Hannah C MooreWesfarmers Centre for Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia, Subiaco, Western Australia, Australia. Hannah.Moore@telethonkids.org.au.
Lauren TraceyWestern Australia Department of Health, Communicable Disease Control Directorate, Shenton Park, WA, 6008, Australia. Lauren.Tracey@health.wa.gov.au.
Richard SakerJoondalup Health Campus, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia. SakerR@ramsayhealth.com.au.
Catherine JonesInfection Control, King Edward Memorial Hospital, Subiaco, Western Australia, Australia. Catherine.Jones@health.wa.gov.au.
Paul V EfflerSchool of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia. Paul.Effler@health.wa.gov.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough influenza vaccination is recommended during pregnancy as standard of care, limited surveillance data are available for monitoring uptake. Our aim was to evaluate the validity of existing surveillance in Western Australia for measuring antenatal influenza immunisations.

methodsThe self-reported vaccination status of 563 women who delivered between April and October 2013 was compared against three passive data collection sources: a state-wide antenatal influenza vaccination database maintained by the Department of Health, a public maternity hospital database, and a private health service database. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for each system using self-report as the "gold standard."

resultsThe state-wide antenatal vaccination database detected 45.7 % (95 % CI: 40.1-51.4 %) of influenza vaccinations, the public maternity hospital database detected 66.7 % (95 % CI: 55.1-76.9 %), and the private health service database detected 29.1 % (95 % CI: 20.5-39.4 %). Specificity exceeded 90 % and positive predictive values exceeded 80 % for each system. Sensitivity was lowest for women whose antenatal care was provided by a private obstetrician.

conclusionsExisting resources for surveillance of antenatal influenza vaccinations detect 29-67 % of vaccinations. Considering the importance of influenza immunisation as a public health intervention, particularly in pregnant women, improvements to routine monitoring of influenza vaccination is warranted.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesPopulation SurveillancePregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousPrenatal CareVaccinationWestern AustraliaInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID26593061
PMCPMC4656178

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.