ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)
Estimating Vaccine Hesitancy in Colorado by Using Immunization Information System Data.
Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesVaccine hesitancy is a complex issue that threatens global health. We used data from the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS) to quantify vaccine hesitancy.
methodsWe examined immunization records from CIIS for patients age 2 up to 9 months to estimate vaccine hesitancy by tabulating the number of doses received per visit and comparing it with the number of expected doses based on recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. We calculated the percentage of patients in each vaccine hesitancy group who were up to date on the 7-antigen series by age 35 months. We examined the distribution of vaccine-hesitant populations among vaccination providers who report to CIIS to estimate the difference in vaccine-hesitant patient populations among vaccination providers in Colorado.
resultsOf 201 450 patients, 5147 (2.6%) consistently limited the number of shots received at each visit as compared with recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices; 166 927 (82.9%) patients did not limit the number of shots received; 5693 (2.8%) limited the number of shots received at >1 visit but not all visits; and 23 683 (11.8%) limited the number of shots received at only 1 visit. We found differences in vaccine hesitancy distributions among certain Colorado vaccination providers.
conclusionsImmunization information system data, although sometimes incomplete, offer an opportunity to investigate state-level vaccine hesitancy. Areas of future research include performing similar analyses over time and determining geographic and socioeconomic factors that contribute to 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.