ArticleVaccine2018
Examination of universal purchase programs as a driver of vaccine uptake among US States, 1995-2014.
Article in Vaccine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comprehensive review of HPV vaccination policies in the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Understanding the Factors Influencing Health Care Provider Recommendations about Adolescent Vaccines: A Proposed Framework.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImmunization against numerous potentially life-threatening illnesses has been a great public health achievement. In the United States, the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program has provided vaccines to uninsured and underinsured children since the early 1990s, increasing vaccination rates. In recent years, some states have adopted Universal Purchase (UP) programs with the stated aim of further increasing vaccination rates. Under UP programs, states also purchase vaccines for privately-insured children at federally-contracted VFC prices and bill private health insurers for the vaccines through assessments.
methodsIn this study, we estimated the effect of UP adoption in a state on children's vaccination rates using state-level and individual-level data from the 1995-2014 National Immunization Survey. For the state-level analysis, we performed ordinary least squares regression to estimate the state's vaccination rate as a function of whether the state had UP in the given year, state demographic characteristics, other vaccination policies, state fixed effects, and a time trend. For the individual analysis, we performed logistic regression to estimate a child's likelihood of being vaccinated as a function of whether the state had UP in the given year, the child's demographic characteristics, state characteristics and vaccine policies, state fixed effects, and a time trend. We performed separate regressions for each of nine recommended vaccines, as well as composite measures on whether a child was up-to-date on all required vaccines.
resultsIn the both the state-level and individual-level analyses, we found UP had no significant (p < 0.10) effect on any of the vaccines or composite measures in our base case specifications. Results were similar in alternative specifications.
conclusionsWe hypothesize that UP was ineffective in increasing vaccination rates. Policymakers seeking to increase vaccination rates would do well to consider other policies such as addressing provider practice issues and vaccine hesitancy.
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.