OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess respondents' self-reported choices for vaccinating their young children; knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs (KABs) about vaccination; and communication with their child's vaccination provider. METHODS: A national telephone survey of 1500 parents of children aged 6 to 23 months was conducted in 2010. We calculated proportions of parents who had chosen-or planned-to refuse or delay 1 or more recommended vaccines, and proportions for responses to KABs and communication questions, stratified by vaccination choice (ie, refuse or delay). RESULTS: The response rate was 46%. Among the 96.6% of respondents (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.5%-97.4%; weighted n = 1453) who had chosen for their child to receive at least 1 vaccine, 80.6% (95% CI, 78.8%-83.0%) reported that their child had received all vaccines when recommended and 86.5% (95% CI, 84.7%-88.2%) reported that their child would receive remaining vaccines when recommended. Respondents who considered not following recommendations, but ultimately did, cited the physician's recommendation as the reason for vaccinating. Most vaccinators who reported past or planned deviations from recommendations cited only 1 vaccine that they would refuse and/or delay; all vaccines were mentioned. These parents reported approaching vaccination with serious concerns, while believing other parents did not. All parents cited "vaccine side effects" as their top question or concern. Almost all parents talked to a doctor or nurse about vaccines and, overall, satisfaction with communication was high. CONCLUSIONS: Communication about vaccines is important to most parents, but may be challenging for providers, because parental choices vary; thus, efforts to improve and support vaccine communication by providers should continue.

OBJECTIVES: Nationwide among nursing home residents, receipt of the influenza vaccine is 8 to 9 percentage points lower among blacks than among whites. The objective of this study was to determine if the national inequity in vaccination is because of the characteristics of facilities and/or residents. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with multilevel modeling. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: States in which 1% or more of nursing home residents were black and the difference in influenza vaccination coverage between white and black nursing home residents was 1 percentage point or higher (n = 39 states and the District of Columbia). Data on residents (n = 2,359,321) were obtained from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service's Minimum Data Set for October 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009. MEASUREMENTS: Residents' influenza vaccination status (vaccinated, refused vaccine, or not offered vaccination). RESULTS: States with higher overall influenza vaccination coverage among nursing home residents had smaller racial inequities. In nursing homes with higher proportions of black residents, vaccination coverage was lower for both blacks and whites. The most dramatic inequities existed between whites in nursing homes with 0% blacks (L1) and blacks in nursing homes with 50% or more blacks (L5) in states with overall racial inequities of 10 percentage points or more. In these states, more black nursing home residents lived in nursing homes with 50% or more blacks (L5); in general, the same homes with low overall coverage. CONCLUSION: Inequities in influenza vaccination coverage among nursing home residents are largely because of low vaccination coverage in nursing homes with a high proportion of black residents. Findings indicate that implementation of culturally appropriate interventions to increase vaccination in facilities with larger proportions of black residents may reduce the racial gap in influenza vaccination as well as increase overall state-level vaccination.

OBJECTIVES: To determine vaccination coverage at selected ages and by birth cohort and to assess whether all indicated vaccines were administered during vaccination visits. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study. SETTING: National Immunization Survey-Teen 2009 telephone interview. PARTICIPANTS: United States adolescents aged 13 to 17 years with provider-reported vaccination histories (N = 20 066). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Among all adolescents and by birth cohort: coverage estimates for 3 childhood vaccines (measles-containing, hepatitis B, and varicella) and 3 adolescent vaccines (tetanus-diphtheria and/or tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis, meningococcal-containing, and human papillomavirus for girls) at selected ages. RESULTS: By age 11 years, most adolescents had obtained the childhood vaccines. Receipt of a tetanus-diphtheria and/or tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine at ages 11 to 12 years increased significantly from the 1991 to 1996 birth cohort (33.8% vs 68.2%, P < .001); receipt of meningococcal-containing vaccine at ages 11 to 12 years increased significantly from the 1993 to 1996 birth cohort (8.4% vs 50.0%, P < .001). Among girls, receipt of human papillomavirus vaccine at ages 11 to 12 years increased significantly from the 1994 to 1996 birth cohort (11.1% vs 30.5%, P < .001). Overall, 54.9% of adolescents received at least 1 vaccination visit at ages 11 to 12 years. Among adolescents who made a vaccination visit at ages 11 to 12 years and were eligible for vaccination, 19.5% did not receive tetanus-diphtheria and/or tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis, 60.9% did not receive meningococcal-containing, and 62.4% did not receive human papillomavirus vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of vaccines at the recommended ages of 11 to 12 years appears to be increasing; however, providers often do not administer all indicated vaccines during a vaccination visit.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effects of increased parental vaccine safety concerns on physicians' vaccine communication attitudes and practices. PURPOSE: To assess among pediatricians and family medicine (FM) physicians: (1) prevalence of parental requests to deviate from recommended vaccine schedules; (2) responses to such requests; and (3) attitudes about the burden and success of vaccine communications with parents. METHODS: Survey of nationally representative samples of pediatricians and FM physicians (N=696) conducted during February to May 2009 with analysis in 2010. RESULTS: Response rates were 88% for pediatricians and 78% for FM physicians. Overall, 8% of physicians reported that ≥10% of parents refused a vaccine and 20% reported that ≥10% of parents requested to spread out vaccines in a typical month. More pediatricians than FM physicians reported always/often requiring parents to sign a form if they refused vaccination (53% vs 31%, p<0.0001); 64% of all physicians would agree to spread out vaccines in the primary series at least sometimes. When talking with parents with substantial concerns, 53% of physicians reported spending 10-19 minutes and 8% spending ≥20 minutes. Pediatricians were more likely than FM physicians to report their job less satisfying because of parental vaccine concerns (46% vs 21%, p<0.0001). Messages most commonly reported as "very effective" were personal statements such as what they would do for their own children. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of communicating with parents about vaccines is high, especially among pediatricians. Physicians report the greatest success convincing skeptical parents using messages that rely on their personal choices and experiences.

Modelers published thoughtful articles after the 2003 SARS crisis, but had limited if any real-time impact on the global response and may even have inadvertently contributed to a lingering misunderstanding of the means by which the epidemic was controlled. The impact of any intervention depends on its efficiency as well as efficacy, and efficient isolation of infected individuals before they become symptomatic is difficult to imagine. Nonetheless, in exploring the possible impact of quarantine, the product of efficiency and efficacy was varied over the entire unit interval. Another mistake was repeatedly fitting otherwise appropriate gamma distributions to times to event regardless of whether they were stationary or not, particularly onset-isolation intervals whose progressive reduction evidently contributed to SARS control. By virtue of their unknown biology, newly-emerging diseases are more challenging than familiar human scourges. Influenza, for example, recurs annually and has been modeled more thoroughly than any other infectious disease. Moreover, models were integrated into preparedness exercises, during which working relationships were established that bore fruit during the 2009 A/H1N1 pandemic. To provide the most accurate and timely advice possible, especially about the possible impact of measures designed to control diseases caused by novel human pathogens, we must appreciate the value and difficulty of policy-oriented modeling. Effective communication of insights gleaned from modeling SARS will help to ensure that policymakers involve modelers in future outbreaks of newly-emerging infectious diseases. Accordingly, we illustrate the increasingly timely care-seeking by which, together with increasingly accurate diagnoses and effective isolation, SARS was controlled via heuristic arguments and descriptive analyses of familiar observations.