Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27789148›Full record

ArticleVaccine2016

Parental experiences with vaccine information statements: Implications for timing, delivery, and parent-provider immunization communication.

Paula M Frew, Yunmi Chung, Allison Kennedy Fisher, Jay Schamel, Michelle M Basket

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Is informed consent correctly obtained for vaccinations?Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Experimenting with a Prototype Interactive Narrative Game to Improve Knowledge and Beliefs for the HPV Vaccine.HCI International 2021 -- Late breaking papers : HCI applications in health, transport, and industry : 23rd HCI International Conference, HCII 2021, Virtual Event, July 24-29, 2021 Proceedings. International Conference on Human-Computer... · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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.

Paula M FrewEmory University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, United States; Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, United States; Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health, Hubert Department of Global Health, United States; U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, United States. Electronic address: pfrew@emory.edu.
Yunmi ChungOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), United States.
Allison Kennedy FisherU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, United States.
Jay SchamelOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), United States.
Michelle M BasketU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, United States.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe examined Vaccine Information Statements (VIS) dissemination practices and parental use and perceptions.

methodsWe conducted a national online panel survey of 2603 US parents of children aged <7. Primary outcomes included reported VIS receipt, delivery timing, reading experiences, and perceived utility.

resultsMost parents received a VIS (77.2%; [95% CI: 74.5-79.7%]), 59.7% [56.6-62.7%] before vaccination but 14.5% [12.5-16.8%] reported receiving it after their child's immunization; 15.1% [13.0-17.6%] were unsure of receipt status or timing; another 10.7% [9.0-12.6%] reported non-receipt of a VIS. Less than half who received a VIS before vaccination completed it before vaccination (46.2% [42.4, 50.0%]), but most who read at least some found the information useful (95.7% [93.8-97.0%]). Parents who delayed or refused at least one recommended non-influenza vaccine reported fewer opportunities to ask providers VIS questions.

conclusionsMost parents report receiving VIS before vaccination as per federal guidelines. Continued effort is needed to enhance VIS distribution practice and parent-provider VIS content communication.

Indexed as

CommunicationHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeImmunizationParentsVaccinesAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesVaccination RefusalYoung AdultVaccinesChildrenParentsPediatric populationsVaccine acceptabilityVaccine confidenceVaccine delayVaccine hesitancyVaccine information statementVaccine refusal

Identifiers

PMID27789148
PMCPMC6026860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.