EBM

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Targonski, P. V
Right arrow Articles by Poland, G. A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Targonski, P. V
Right arrow Articles by Poland, G. A
Topic Collections
Right arrow EBM Clinical prediction guide
Right arrow EBM Quality improvement
Evidence-Based Medicine 2003; 8:124
© 2003 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.


Quality improvement

Review: patient reminder or recall systems improve immunisation rates

Szilagyi P, Vann J, Bordley C, et al.Interventions aimed at improving immunization rates.Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002;(4):CD003941(latest version 23 Aug 2002)

QUESTION: Are patient reminder or recall systems effective in improving immunisation rates?

Key Words: reminder systems • vaccination

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Data sources
Studies were identified by searching Medline, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, CAB Health Abstracts, and the EPOC register; scanning reference lists of relevant studies and reviews; reviewing abstracts and proceedings from scientific meetings; and contacting study collaborators.

Study selection
Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before and after studies, or interrupted time series studies published in English that evaluated reminder or recall interventions aimed at reminding patients of immunisation visits that were due (reminder) or overdue (recall).

Data extraction
Data were extracted on patient age (newborn to adult); setting (academic, public health, or private); intervention delivery (letter, postcard, telephone, autodialer, or in person), specificity (generic or personal reminders), and number (1 time or multiple reminders); and vaccination schedule. Study quality was assessed (allocation concealment, blinding, follow up, reliable primary outcome measure, and protection against contamination). Outcomes were immunisation rates or the proportion of the target population that was up . . . [Full text of this article]

Paul V Targonski, MD, PhD, Gregory A Poland, MD

Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation
Rochester, Minnesota, USA







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2003 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.