The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Nonmedical Exemptions to School Immunization Requirements: Secular Trends and Association of State Policies With Pertussis Incidence
Abstract
CONTEXT: School immunization requirements have played a major role in controlling vaccine-preventable diseases in the United States. Most states offer nonmedical exemptions to school requirements (religious or personal belief). Exemptors are at increased risk of acquiring and transmitting disease. The role of exemption policies may be especially important for pertussis, which is endemic in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To determine if (1) the rates of nonmedical exemptions differ and have been increasing in states that offer only religious vs personal belief exemptions; (2) the rates of nonmedical exemptions differ and have been increasing in states that have easy vs medium and easy vs difficult processes for obtaining exemptions; and (3) pertussis incidence is associated with policies of granting personal belief exemptions, ease of obtaining exemptions, and acceptance of parental signature as sufficient proof of compliance with school immunization requirements. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed 1991 through 2004 state-level rates of nonmedical exemptions at school entry and 1986 through 2004 pertussis incidence data for individuals aged 18 years or younger. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: State-level exemption rates and pertussis incidence. RESULTS: From 2001 through 2004, states that permitted personal belief exemptions had higher nonmedical exemption rates than states that offered only religious exemptions, and states that easily granted exemptions had higher nonmedical exemption rates in 2002 through 2003 compared with states with medium and difficult exemption processes. The mean exemption rate increased an average of 6% per year, from 0.99% in 1991 to 2.54% in 2004, among states that offered personal belief exemptions. In states that easily granted exemptions, the rate increased 5% per year, from 1.26% in 1991 to 2.51% in 2004. No statistically significant change was seen in states that offered only religious exemptions or that had medium and difficult exemption processes. In multivariate analyses adjusting for demographics, easier granting of exemptions (incidence rate ratio = 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-2.14) and availability of personal belief exemptions (incidence rate ratio = 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.13) were associated with increased pertussis incidence. CONCLUSIONS: Permitting personal belief exemptions and easily granting exemptions are associated with higher and increasing nonmedical US exemption rates. State policies granting personal belief exemptions and states that easily grant exemptions are associated with increased pertussis incidence. States should examine their exemption policies to ensure control of pertussis and other vaccine-preventable diseases.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vaccine Safety: Current and Future Challenges
Chen, R. T., & Hibbs, B. (1998) · Pediatric Annals · doi:10.3928/0090-4481-19980701-11 · Cited by 128
Cited by
Increasing Vaccination: Putting Psychological Science Into Action
Brewer, N. T., Chapman, G. B., Rothman, A. J., Leask, J., & Kempe, A. (2017) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100618760521 · Cited by 1,233
Validity and reliability of a survey to identify vaccine-hesitant parents
Opel, D. J., Taylor, J. A., Mangione-Smith, R., Solomon, C., Zhao, C., Catz, S., & Martin, D. (2011) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.06.115 · Cited by 409
Using behavioral insights to increase vaccination policy effectiveness
Betsch, C., Böhm, R., & Chapman, G. B. (2015) · Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1177/2372732215600716 · Cited by 378
Omer, S. B., Enger, K. S., Moulton, L. H., Halsey, N. A., Stokley, S., & Salmon, D. A. (2008) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwn263 · Cited by 326
Self-citationCervical cancer prevention: New tools and old barriers
Scarinci, I. C., Garcia, F. A. R., Kobetz, E., Partridge, E. E., Brandt, H. M., Bell, M. C., Dignan, M., Ma, G. X., Daye, J. L., & Castle, P. E. (2010) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.25065 · Cited by 293
Metadata
- Authors
- Omer, S. B., Pan, W. K. Y., Halsey, N. A., Stokley, S., Moulton, L. H., Navar, A. M., Pierce, M., & Salmon, D. A.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2006-10-11
- Volume
- 296
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 1757
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2045502190
- Cited by
- 387
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Nonmedical Exemptions to School Immunization Requirements: Secular Trends and Association of State Policies With Pertussis Incidence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.296.14.1757
- The paper
- Omer, S. B., Pan, W. K. Y., Halsey, N. A., Stokley, S., Moulton, L. H., Navar, A. M., Pierce, M., & Salmon, D. A. (2006). Nonmedical Exemptions to School Immunization Requirements: Secular Trends and Association of State Policies With Pertussis Incidence. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.14.1757
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.