Objectives Sources of immunization data include state registries or immunization information systems (IIS), medical records, and surveys. Little is known about the quality of these data sources or the feasibility of using IIS data for research. We assessed the feasibility of collecting immunization information for a national children's health study by accessing existing IIS data and comparing the completeness of these data against medical record abstractions (MRA) and parent report. Staff time needed to obtain IIS and MRA data was assessed. Methods We administered a questionnaire to state-level IIS representatives to ascertain availability and completeness of their data for research and gather information about data formats. We evaluated quality of data from IIS, medical records, and reports from parents of 119 National Children's Study participants at three locations. Results IIS data were comparable to MRA data and both were more complete than parental report. Agreement between IIS and MRA data was greater than between parental report and MRA, suggesting IIS and MRA are better sources than parental report. Obtaining IIS data took less staff time than chart review, making IIS data linkage for research a preferred choice. Conclusions IIS survey results indicate data can be obtained by researchers using data linkages. IIS are an accessible and feasible child immunization information source and these registries reduce reliance on parental report or medical record abstraction. Researchers seeking to link IIS data with large multi-site studies should consider acquiring IIS data, but may need strategies to overcome barriers to data completeness and linkage.
Validity of prenatal immunization data from different sources has not been assessed. We evaluated prenatal 2009 H1N1 and seasonal influenza (FLU) data obtained from state immunization information systems (IIS), medical record abstraction (MRA), and participant recall using medical care logs (NCS–MCL). 2009 H1N1 and FLU data were obtained from IIS and MRA for 325 pregnant women participating in the National Children’s Study at three locations (SD/MN, NC, WI). Women recalled immunizations at first pregnancy visit and at 16–17 and 36 weeks’ gestation (NCS–MCL). The proportion of women with vaccine information obtainable from each data source was determined, and proportions immunized as determined using different data sources were compared. IIS data were available for 82 %, MRA for 97 %, and NCS–MCL for 93 % of women. No mention of either vaccine occurred in 29 % (range 4–48 %) of IIS, 40 % of MRA (25–59 %), and 59 % (43–82 %) in NCS–MCL. Best agreement between sources was 2009 H1N1 vaccine in MRA versus IIS [kappa (95 % CI) of 0.44 (0.32–0.55)], with poorest agreement for FLU in IIS versus NCS–MCL [0.11 (−0.03 to 0.25)]. IIS was the most sensitive method for identifying women receiving 2009 H1N1 vaccine (92 %); MRA was most sensitive for FLU vaccine (81 %). IIS provided the most complete and sensitive data for 2009 H1N1 immunizations and MRA the most complete and sensitive data for FLU; IIS data were available for a smaller percent of population than MRA. NCS–MCL was the least sensitive method for identifying vaccinated women.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.