Skip to main content
Log in

Method of Administration Affects Adolescent Post-immunization Survey Response Rate: Phone, Paper, Internet

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Public Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The recent introduction of new vaccines into the school-based immunization program in British Columbia (BC) included monitoring of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) for these new vaccines. This commentary discusses different methods used to collect AEFIs in school immunization campaigns and the effects on response rate. The results of a study using an internet-based tool inspired this paper. The study examined adverse events following human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine given to grades 6 and 9 students. The low response rate of the internet survey resulted in insufficient findings regarding adverse events. Consequent to the analysis of the study’s data, a literature review was conducted to examine survey methodologies used to collect adverse event data following school-based immunization of adolescents. A PubMed search used various combinations of the following terms: vaccine, immunization, immunization programs, reactogenicity, adverse reactions, safety, adolescent, schoolchildren, and survey. Potentially relevant papers were identified based upon the titles and abstracts and subsequently reviewed. Only four studies were deemed appropriate for comparison purposes: all were done in Canada.

Résumé

L’introduction récente de nouveaux vaccins dans le programme de vaccination en milieu scolaire de la Colombie-Britannique a compris la surveillance de leurs effets secondaires suivant l’immunisation (ESSI). Nous expliquons les différentes méthodes employées pour recueillir les données sur les ESSI lors des campagnes de vaccination à l’école et leurs effets sur le taux de réponse. Notre commentaire s’inspire des résultats d’une étude ayant utilisé un outil Internet. L’étude portait sur les effets secondaires de l’administration du vaccin contre le virus du papillome humain (VPH) à des élèves de la 6e à la 9e année. En raison d’un faible taux de réponse au sondage en ligne, on a obtenu des résultats insuffisants sur les effets secondaires. Après l’analyse des données de l’étude, nous avons mené une enquête bibliographique afin d’examiner les méthodes de sondage utilisées pour recueillir des données sur les effets secondaires de vaccins administrés en milieu scolaire à des adolescents. Nous avons fait une recherche dans PubMed en utilisant diverses combinaisons des termes vaccin, immunisation, programmes d’immunisation, réactogénicité, réactions indésirables, sécurité, adolescent, élèves et sondage. Les articles potentiellement pertinents ont été identifiés à partir de leurs titres et de leurs résumés, puis examinés. Seules quatre études ont été jugées utiles à des fins de comparaison; les quatre avaient été menées au Canada.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. British Columbia Centre for Disease Control. Communicable disease control: Immunization program. Vancouver, BC: BCCDC, 2010. Available at: http://www.bccdc.ca/dis-cond/comm-manual/CDManualChap2.htm (Accessed August 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Public Health Agency of Canada. The Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System (CAEFISS). Ottawa, ON: PHAC, 2008. Available at: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/vs-sv/caefiss-eng.php (Accessed August 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Canadian Pediatric Society. Canadian Immunization Monitoring Program Active (IMPACT). Ottawa: CPS, 2010. Available at: http://www.cps.ca/Eng-lish/surveillance/impact/impact.htm (Accessed August 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Pielak KL, Buxton JA, McIntyre CC, Tu A, Botnik M. Determining if vaccines should be given together or separately (Grades 6 and 9). Unpublished manuscript.

  5. David ST, Hemsley C, Pasquali PE, Larke B, Buxton JA, Lior LY. Enhanced surveillance for adverse events following immunization: Two years of dTap catchup among high school students in Yukon, Canada (2004, 2005). Can J Public Health 2006;97(6):465–69.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tremblay M, Grenier JL, De Serres G, Menard S, Toth E, Roussel R, et al. Adverse events after vaccination with dTap in high school students who have previously been vaccinated with d2T5. Can Commun Dis Rep 2006;32(3):25–28.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pielak KL, McIntyre CC, Remple VP, Buxton JA, Skowronski DM. One arm or two? Concurrent administration of meningococcal C conjugate and hepatitis B vaccines in pre-teens. Can J Public Health 2008;99(1):52–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dobson S, Scheifele D, Bell A. Assessment of a universal, school-based hepatitis B vaccination program. JAMA 1995;274(15):1209–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. VanGeest JB, Johnson TP, Welch VL. Methodologies for improving response rates in surveys of physicians: A systematic review. Eval Health Prof 2007;30(4):303–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shih TH, Fan X. Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: A meta-analysis. Field Methods 2008;20:249–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Aday LA, Cornelius LJ. Designing and Conducting Health Surveys: A Comprehensive Guide, 3rd Ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Willoughby T. A short-term longitudinal study of internet and computer game use by adolescent boys and girls: Prevalence, frequency of use, and psychosocial predictors. Developmental Psychol 2008;44(1):195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen L. Pielak MSN.

Additional information

Source of support: British Columbia Centre for Disease Control.

Conflict of Interest: None to declare.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pielak, K.L., Buxton, J., McIntyre, C. et al. Method of Administration Affects Adolescent Post-immunization Survey Response Rate: Phone, Paper, Internet. Can J Public Health 102, 355–357 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03404176

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03404176

Keywords

Motsclés

Navigation