Alison W Saville1, Brenda Beaty2, L Miriam Dickinson3, Steven Lockhart4, Allison Kempe5. 1. Children's Outcomes Research Program, The Children's Hospital, Denver, Colo. Electronic address: Alison.Saville@ucdenver.edu. 2. Children's Outcomes Research Program, The Children's Hospital, Denver, Colo; Colorado Health Outcomes Program, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colo. 3. Children's Outcomes Research Program, The Children's Hospital, Denver, Colo; Colorado Health Outcomes Program, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colo; Department of Family Medicine, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colo. 4. Children's Outcomes Research Program, The Children's Hospital, Denver, Colo. 5. Children's Outcomes Research Program, The Children's Hospital, Denver, Colo; Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colo.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the following among parents of young children: (1) preferences about the source of immunization reminder/recall (R/R) messages, (2) the degree of acceptability of different R/R modalities, and (3) factors that influence preferences, including rural and urban characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a survey among parents of children 19 to 35 months old who needed ≥1 immunization according to the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS). Equal numbers of urban and rural respondents were randomly selected. Up to 4 surveys were mailed to each parent who had a valid address. RESULTS: After removing invalid addresses, the response rate was 55% (334 of 607). Half of parents (49.7%) had no preference about whether the public health department or their child's doctor sent reminders. Urban parents were more likely to prefer R/R come from their child's doctor (46.7%) compared to rural parents (33.7%), P = .003. Mail was the preferred R/R method (57.7%), then telephone (17.0%), e-mail (12.7%), and text message (10.7%). Although not preferred, 60.1% reported it would be acceptable to receive R/R by e-mail and 46.2% by text message. Factors associated with preferring to receive R/R from their child's doctor were urban residence and educational level of college graduate or greater. CONCLUSIONS: A large portion of parents are willing to be reminded about vaccinations by their health department rather than their child's provider and via novel modalities, such as e-mail or text messaging. Urbanicity and higher educational level were associated with preferring that R/R come from a provider.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the following among parents of young children: (1) preferences about the source of immunization reminder/recall (R/R) messages, (2) the degree of acceptability of different R/R modalities, and (3) factors that influence preferences, including rural and urban characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a survey among parents of children 19 to 35 months old who needed ≥1 immunization according to the Colorado Immunization Information System (CIIS). Equal numbers of urban and rural respondents were randomly selected. Up to 4 surveys were mailed to each parent who had a valid address. RESULTS: After removing invalid addresses, the response rate was 55% (334 of 607). Half of parents (49.7%) had no preference about whether the public health department or their child's doctor sent reminders. Urban parents were more likely to prefer R/R come from their child's doctor (46.7%) compared to rural parents (33.7%), P = .003. Mail was the preferred R/R method (57.7%), then telephone (17.0%), e-mail (12.7%), and text message (10.7%). Although not preferred, 60.1% reported it would be acceptable to receive R/R by e-mail and 46.2% by text message. Factors associated with preferring to receive R/R from their child's doctor were urban residence and educational level of college graduate or greater. CONCLUSIONS: A large portion of parents are willing to be reminded about vaccinations by their health department rather than their child's provider and via novel modalities, such as e-mail or text messaging. Urbanicity and higher educational level were associated with preferring that R/R come from a provider.
Authors: Elyse Olshen Kharbanda; Melissa S Stockwell; Harrison W Fox; Vaughn I Rickert Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2009-10-15 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Peter G Szilagyi; Stanley Schaffer; Richard Barth; Laura P Shone; Sharon G Humiston; Sandra Ambrose; Francisco Averhoff Journal: Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med Date: 2006-02
Authors: Allison Kempe; Sean T O'Leary; Jo Ann Shoup; Shannon Stokley; Steven Lockhart; Anna Furniss; L Miriam Dickinson; Juliana Barnard; Matthew F Daley Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-02-26 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Peter G Szilagyi; Christina Albertin; Alejandra Casillas; Rebecca Valderrama; O Kenrik Duru; Michael K Ong; Sitaram Vangala; Chi-Hong Tseng; Cynthia M Rand; Sharon G Humiston; Sharon Evans; Michael Sloyan; Carlos Lerner Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Philip J Smith; Edgar K Marcuse; Jane F Seward; Zhen Zhao; Walter A Orenstein Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2015 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Alison W Saville; Dennis Gurfinkel; Brenda L Beaty; Alison E Chi; Amanda Dayton; Laura Hurley; Krithika Suresh; Allison Kempe Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2020-12-29