Search

Researchers strive to design and implement high-quality surveys to maximize the utility of the data collected. The definitions of quality and usefulness, however, vary from survey to survey and depend on the analytic needs. Survey teams must evaluate the trade-offs of various decisions, such as when results are needed and their required level of precision, in addition to practical constraints like budget, before finalizing the design. Characteristics within the concept of fit for purpose (FfP) can provide the framework for considering the trade-offs. Furthermore, this tool can enable an evaluation of quality for the resulting estimates. Implementation of a FfP framework in this context, however, is not straightforward. In this article, we provide the reader with a glimpse of a FfP framework in action for obtaining estimates on early season influenza vaccination coverage estimates and on knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and barriers related to influenza and influenza prevention among civilian noninstitutionalized adults aged 18 years and older in the United States. The result is the National Internet Flu Survey (NIFS), an annual, two-week internet survey sponsored by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In addition to critical design decisions, we use the established NIFS FfP framework to discuss the quality of the NIFS in meeting the intended objectives. We highlight aspects that work well and other survey traits requiring further evaluation. Differences found in comparing the NIFS to the National Flu Survey, the National Health Interview Survey, and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System are discussed via their respective FfP characteristics. The findings presented here highlight the importance of the FfP framework for designing surveys, defining data quality, and providing a set a metrics used to advertise the intended use of the survey data and results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Objectives To determine the proportion of children whose parents prefer them to receive live, attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) or inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV), examine reasons for preferences, and determine what percentage of vaccinated children receive other than the preferred type of vaccine and why. Methods Parental-reported data for the 2014–15 and 2015–16 influenza seasons from the National Immunization Survey-Flu (NIS-Flu), a random-digit-dialed, dual frame (landline and cellular telephone) survey of households with children, were analyzed. We calculated the proportions of vaccinated children aged 2–17 years whose parents preferred LAIV, IIV, or had no preference, and the proportions that were vaccinated with other than the preferred type of vaccine. Results For the 2014–15 and 2015–16 seasons, 55.2% and 53.7%, respectively, of vaccinated children had parents who reported no preference for either IIV or LAIV. The percentage who preferred LAIV was 22.7% and 21.7%, and IIV was 22.1% and 24.7%. The most common reason given by parents for preferring LAIV was the child's fear of needles (70.9%) and for preferring IIV was belief that the shot is more effective (29.0%). Approximately one-third of vaccinated children whose parents preferred LAIV received IIV only. Conclusions The main finding of this study was that most parents do not have a vaccine type preference for their children. The lack of overwhelming preference is advantageous for the maintenance of vaccination coverage levels during times when one vaccine type is not available or not recommended such as in the 2016–17 and 2017–18 seasons when there was a temporary recommendation not to administer LAIV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Studies are published on settings adults receive influenza vaccination but few have reported on settings children are vaccinated and how this might be changing over time or vary by socio-demographics. Methods Data from the National Immunization Survey-Flu were analyzed to assess place of influenza vaccination among vaccinated children 6 months–17 years during the 2010–11, 2011–12, 2012–13, and 2013–14 influenza seasons. The percentage of children vaccinated at each place was calculated overall and by age, race/ethnicity, income, and Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Results The places children received influenza vaccination varied little over four recent influenza seasons. From the 2010–11 through 2013–14 influenza seasons the percentage of vaccinated children receiving influenza vaccination at a doctor's office was 64.1%, 65.1%, 65.3%, and 65.3%, respectively with no differences from one season to the next. Likewise, for vaccination at clinics or health centers (17.8%, 17.5%, 17.0%. 18.0%), health departments (3.2%, 3.6%, 3.0%, 2.8%), and other non-medical places (1.6%, 1.4%, 1.2%, 1.1%), there were no differences from one season to the next. There were some differences for vaccinations at hospitals, pharmacies, and schools. There was considerable variability in the place of influenza vaccination by age, race/ethnicity, income, and MSA. Fewer Hispanic children were vaccinated at a doctor's office than black, white, and other or multiple race children and fewer black children and children of other or multiple races were vaccinated at a doctor's office than white children. More children at or below the poverty level were vaccinated at a clinic or health center than all of the other income groups. Conclusion Most vaccinated children receive their influenza vaccination at a doctor's office. Place of vaccination changed little over four recent influenza seasons. Large variability in place of vaccination exists by age, race/ethnicity, income, and MSA. Monitoring place of vaccination can help shape future immunization programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We sought to describe vaccination with influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent (2009 H1N1) and trivalent seasonal (seasonal) vaccines among pregnant women during the 2009 through 2010 influenza season. A national H1N1 flu survey was conducted April through June 2010. The 2009 H1N1 and seasonal vaccination coverage estimates were 45.7% and 32.1%, respectively, among pregnant women aged 18-49 years. Receipt of a health care provider''s recommendation for vaccination, perceived effectiveness of influenza vaccinations, and perceived high chance of influenza infection were independently associated with higher 2009 H1N1 and seasonal vaccination coverage. Pregnancy during October 2009 through January 2010 was independently associated with higher 2009 H1N1 vaccination coverage. The 2009 H1N1 vaccination level among pregnant women was higher than the seasonal vaccination level during the 2009 through 2010 season; it was also higher than vaccination among nonpregnant women with and without high-risk conditions. Health care providers and public health messaging played important roles in influencing vaccination behavior. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]