CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 208Vaccine Coverage and HesitancyImmune responses and vaccinationsIntramuscular injections and effects

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 110 of the 116 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Vaccination of special populations: Protecting the vulnerable

Open access
Doherty, Mark, Schmidt-Ott, Ruprecht, Santos, Jose Ignacio, Stanberry, Lawrence R., Hofstetter, Annika M., Rosenthal, Susan L., Cunningham, Anthony L.·2016·Vaccine
DOI 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.11.015
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

One of the strategic objectives of the 2011-2020 Global Vaccine Action Plan is for the benefits of immunisation to be equitably extended to all people. This approach encompasses special groups at increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases, such as preterm infants and pregnant women, as well as those with chronic and immune-compromising medical conditions or at increased risk of disease due to immunosenescence. Despite demonstrations of effectiveness and safety, vaccine uptake in these special groups is frequently lower than expected, even in developed countries with vaccination strategies in place. For example, uptake of the influenza vaccine in pregnancy rarely exceeds 50% in developed countries and, although data are scarce, it appears that only half of preterm infants are up-to-date with routine paediatric vaccinations. Many people with chronic medical conditions or who are immunocompromised due to disease or aging are also under-vaccinated. In the US, coverage among people aged 65years or older was 67% for the influenza vaccine in the 2014-2015 season and 55-60% for tetanus and pneumococcal vaccines in 2013, while the coverage rate for herpes zoster vaccination among those aged 60years or older was only 24%. In most other countries, rates are far lower. Reasons for under-vaccination of special groups include fear of adverse outcomes or illness caused by the vaccine, the inconvenience (and in some settings, cost) of vaccination and lack of awareness of the need for vaccination or national recommendations. There is also evidence that healthcare providers' attitudes towards vaccination are among the most important influences on the decision to vaccinate. It is clear that physicians' adherence to recommendations needs to be improved, particularly where patients receive care from multiple subspecialists and receive little or no care from primary care providers.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.11.015

Cites

110 of 110 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 208

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Doherty, M., Schmidt-Ott, R., Santos, J. I., Stanberry, L. R., Hofstetter, A. M., Rosenthal, S. L., & Cunningham, A. L.
Affiliations
  • GlaxoSmithKline (Belgium) (BE)
  • Morgan Stanley Children's Hospital (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
  • Westmead Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Doherty, Mark
ORCID
Venue
Vaccine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
34
Issue
52
Pages
6681-6690
ISSN
0264-410X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.11.015
OpenAlex
W2549658434
Cited by
208
References
116
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 2
FWCI
2.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Vaccine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Merck
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immune responses and vaccinations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Intramuscular injections and effects
Keywords
vaccine uptake, preterm infants, pregnant women, influenza vaccination, chronic disease, immunocompromised patients, immunosenescence, older adults, vaccine hesitancy, clinician attitudes, Global Vaccine Action Plan, vaccination coverage
MeSH terms
Humans, Vaccination, Global Health, Disease Transmission, Infectious, Vulnerable Populations

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