A Parent-Driven, Computer-Based Vaccine Information System: Addressing Variability in Information Needs for the Varicella Vaccine

Raman, Subha V.; Jacobson, Robert M.

doi:10.4065/80.2.187

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[18] , [19] This study also does not consider whether some vaccine recipients desire additional information beyond what is offered. [20] The strengths of our study include comparisons between widely used and easily accessible online material regarding COVID-19 vaccines. This study also uses standardized, reliable, and widely used metrics to assess readability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Readability of COVID-19 vaccine information for the general public

Bothun

Feeder

2022

Vaccine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Readability of COVID-19 vaccine information for the general public

Bothun

Feeder

2022

Vaccine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Only four of the eighteen vaccine risk communication studies in the last decade measured satisfaction with the amount of information provided in any capacity [22,26,30,31]. While difficult to quantify, informed decision-making should be measured following vaccine risk communication interventions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Davis et al reported inadequate comprehension of even a simplified version of the VIS [30]. Furthermore, a great deal of variability exists in the amount of vaccine information desired by parents [22]. In addition to the complexities posed by variations in parental literacy levels and desire for information, it is difficult, if not impossible, for a one page form to adequately cover the multiple diseases prevented by a combination vaccine.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The eighteen studies included were of the following designs: four cross-sectional [20][21][22][23], three pre-post tests [24][25][26], three cohort studies [27][28][29], and eight randomized trials ( Table 2) [16,[30][31][32][33][34][35][36]. There were fourteen unique first authors; TC Davis accounted for four of the eighteen studies (22%), and Zúñiga de Nuncio authored two more (11%).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Vaccine Risk Communication Interventions in the United States, 1996-2006: A Review

Irving

Salmon

Curbow

2007

CPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Vaccines have been tremendously successful in preventing many childhood diseases. However, this success has created new challenges: parents are no longer familiar with vaccine-preventable diseases and as a result the object of parental fear has shifted from diseases to vaccines. In this modern era of vaccination, vaccine risk communication plays an increasingly important role in immunization programs. A 1997 Institute of Medicine Risk Communication and Vaccination workshop concluded that: "Although health risk communication has been an active research area for several decades, the science and practice of vaccine risk communication are not yet well developed". Objective: To review vaccine risk communication interventions conducted and evaluated in the last decade in the UnitedStates while identifying opportunities for improvement in this area. Search Strategy:We searched the CSA, PubMed, and PsycINFO databases. The following search terms were used: vaccine(s), vaccination, immunization, communication, parent(s), risk, risk assessment, safety, attitude(s), belief(s). References reported in all articles identified from the database searches were reviewed to locate additional studies. Study Selection: Studies related to vaccine risk communication, including communication interventions involving parents and/or patients, and published in English between 1996 and October 2006 in peer-reviewed journals were included in this review.Data Extraction: First author, year of publication, study design, number of participants, study population, study objectives, findings, and authors' recommendations were extracted independently and in duplicate. Results:Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria; four studies were evaluations of immunization reminder systems that included an educational component. The studies included a variety of outcome measures; most commonly assessed were immunization rates, vaccine or disease knowledge, intervention material recognition, recall and/or comprehension, and parental satisfaction with the intervention materials. While there was considerable variability of findings due to the variation in types of studies, all eighteen reported some favorable finding. Overall, the authors made few recommendations regarding future vaccine risk communication strategies.Conclusions: It is difficult to determine if substantial progress has been made since the Institute of Medicine workshop; the literature is lacking due to the scant number of studies, types of interventions developed, and the limited number of rigorous evaluations. The development and rigorous evaluation of vaccine risk communication strategies is critical to the success of our immunization programs.

show abstract

“…Studies show that although some people believe that vaccine pamphlets provide too much information, others may not think the information received is adequate, and at least 1 study has evaluated provision of vaccine related material based on the subject choosing the grade level complexity they prefer. 23 The strengths of our study include comparing consent forms for all 5 phase 3 COVID-19 vaccines conducted in the United States.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Readability of Participant Informed Consent Forms and Informational Documents

Bothun

Feeder

2021

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To assess the readability of the informed consent forms from the phase III COVID-19 vaccine trials conducted in the United States. Patients English consent forms utilized for patients in phase III COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials. Consent forms were obtained in October 2020. Methods Using Microsoft Word tools, we analyzed the readability (i.e., the ease of reading) of written consent forms and informational documents from phase III COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials in the United States from the following manufacturers: AstraZeneca, Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Novavax. Results Due to low readability and several format factors, this study determined that none of the consent forms or informational documents from the recent phase III COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials conducted in the United States met readability standards at the recommended 7 th grade readability level for the average vaccine research volunteer in any readability category. The average English-speaking vaccine-trial volunteer would have great difficulty comprehending the information provided in the consent forms and informational documents. To ensure that study subjects receive and fully comprehend information regarding a clinical study and can provide reliable consent, greater attention should be given to the development and use of simplified consent forms, multimedia formatting, personal discussion, and comprehension assessments.

show abstract

A Parent-Driven, Computer-Based Vaccine Information System: Addressing Variability in Information Needs for the Varicella Vaccine

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

Readability of COVID-19 vaccine information for the general public

Readability of COVID-19 vaccine information for the general public

Vaccine Risk Communication Interventions in the United States, 1996-2006: A Review

Readability of Participant Informed Consent Forms and Informational Documents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About