PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Immunization Schedule”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2000

Recommended childhood immunization schedule--United States, 2000.

Each year, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) reviews the recommended childhood immunization schedule to ensure it remains current with changes in manufacturers' vaccine formulations, revisions in recommendations for the use of licensed vaccines, and recommendations for newly licensed vaccines. This report presents the recommended childhood immunization schedule for 2000 and explains the changes that have occurred since January 1999.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.↗
PubMed1999

Recommended childhood immunization schedule--United States, 1999.

Each year, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) reviews the recommended childhood immunization schedule to ensure it remains current with changes in manufacturers' vaccine formulations, revised recommendations for the use of licensed vaccines, and recommendations for newly licensed vaccines. This report presents the recommended childhood immunization schedule for 1999 and explains the changes that have occurred since January 1998.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Recommended childhood immunization schedule--United States, 2001.

Each year, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) reviews the recommended childhood immunization schedule to ensure that it remains current with changes in manufacturers' vaccine formulations, revisions in recommendations for the use of licensed vaccines, and recommendations for newly licensed vaccines. This report presents the recommended childhood immunization schedule for 2001 (Figure 1) and documents the changes that have occurred since the January 2000 publication.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Recommended childhood immunization schedule--United States, 2002.

Each year, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) reviews the recommended childhood immunization schedule to ensure that it is current with changes in manufacturers' vaccine formulations, has revised recommendations for the use of licensed vaccines, and has recommendations for newly licensed vaccines. This report presents the recommended childhood immunization schedule for 2002, which has remained the same in content since January 2001 but has a redesigned format.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Immunization of Macaca fascicularis with inactivated SIV preparations: challenge with human- or monkey-derived SIV and the effects of a longer immunization schedule.

In cynomolgus monkeys, we compared two human-derived SIVmac251 whole virus vaccines, a long vs short immunization schedule, and two different challenge viruses. Both vaccines induced protection after challenge with human-derived SIVmac251/32H. There was no difference between the two schedules of immunization. Seven monkeys, five of which were protected following the first challenge, were reboosted and rechallenged with monkey-derived SIVmac251, but no protection was observed. The titers of anti-human cell or -SIV neutralizing antibodies were not related to protection.

Animals↗
PubMed1995

Recommended childhood immunization schedule United States--1995. American Academy of Pediatrics and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

The need for a single childhood immunization schedule prompted the unification of previous vaccine recommendations made by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). In addition to presenting the newly recommended schedule for the administration of childhood vaccines, this article addresses the previous differences between the AAP and ACIP schedules, and provides the rationale for changing previous recommendations.

Age Factors↗
PubMed1996

Knowledge of the childhood immunization schedule and of contraindications to vaccinate by private and public providers in Los Angeles.

BACKGROUND: Missed opportunities to vaccinate occur commonly and contribute to the underimmunization of young children. They are related to provider knowledge of the immunization schedule and contraindications to vaccination. METHODS: We surveyed private physicians (n = 50) and public health department physicians and nurses (n = 47). The questionnaire presented two sets of clinical scenarios in which they had to assess what immunizations were due and assess whether there were any contraindications to vaccination. RESULTS: The mean percent correct responses on the immunization schedule questions was 64% (sd = 3.6%) for the private physicians, 71% (SD = 4.7%) for the public physicians and 78% (SD = 2.8%) for the public nurses (P = 0.04). The mean percent correct responses on the contraindications to vaccinate questions was 73% (SD = 5.4%) for public physicians, 58% (SD = 3.3%) for private physicians, and 55% (SD = 4.7%) for public health nurses (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our survey shows that providers in the public and private sectors have important deficits in their knowledge of the immunization schedule and the appropriate contraindications to vaccinate which might lead to missed opportunities to vaccinate and low immunization coverage.

Child↗
PubMed1996

Recommended childhood immunization schedule--United States, January-June 1996.

In January 1995, the recommended childhood immunization schedule was published in MMWR following issuance by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Academy of Family Physicians (1). This schedule was the first unified schedule developed through a collaborative process among the recommending groups, the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry, and the Food and Drug Administration. This collaborative process should assist in maintaining a common childhood vaccination schedule and enabling further simplification of the schedule. This notice presents the recommended childhood immunization schedule for January-June 1996 (Figure 1) to incorporate licensure of varicella zoster virus vaccine (Var) and recommendations for adolescent hepatitis B vaccination.

Child↗
PubMed2003

Recommended childhood and adolescent immunization schedule. United States, 2003. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Each year, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) reviews the recommended childhood and adolescent immunization schedule to ensure that it is current with changes in manufacturers' vaccine formulations and contains revised recommendations for the use of licensed vaccines, including those newly licensed. The recommended childhood immunization schedule for 2003 has remained the same in content and format since January 2002 (Figure 1). The recommendations and format have been approved by ACIP, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Effect of a booster dose of serogroup B meningococcal vaccine on antibody response to Neisseria meningitidis in mice vaccinated with different immunization schedules.

The generation and maintenance of memory antibody response by different primary immunization schedules with the Cuban-produced outer membrane protein based vaccine was investigated in a murine model. We analyzed the duration of the antibody response (IgG-ELISA and bactericidal titer) and the effect of a booster dose on the antibody response. The IgG avidity index was determined in an attempt to find a marker for memory development. This study also included an analysis of IgG subclasses induced by primary and booster immunization. The specificity of bactericidal antibodies was investigated using local strains of the same serotype/serosubtype (4,7:P1.19,15) as the vaccine strain and mutant strains lacking major outer membrane proteins. A significant recall response was induced by a booster dose given 7 months after a primary series of 2, 3 or 4 doses of vaccine. The primary antibody response showed a positive dose-effect. In contrast, a negative dose-effect was found on the booster bactericidal antibody response. There was a significant increase in IgG1 levels after the fourth and booster doses. Three doses of vaccine were required to induce a significant increase in IgG avidity. Two injections of vaccine induced a significant antibody response to PorA protein, while 4 injections induced a larger range of specificities.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

Economic evaluation of the 7-vaccine routine childhood immunization schedule in the United States, 2001.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic impact of the routine US childhood immunization schedule: diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis; tetanus and diphtheria toxoids; Haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate; inactivated poliovirus; measles, mumps, and rubella; hepatitis B; and varicella vaccines. DESIGN: Decision tree-based analysis was conducted using population-based vaccination coverage, published vaccine efficacies, historical data on disease incidence before vaccination, and disease incidence reported for 1995-2001. Costs were estimated using the direct cost and societal (direct and indirect costs) perspectives. Program costs included vaccine, administration, vaccine-associated adverse events, and parent travel and time lost. All costs were inflated to 2001 US dollars, and all costs and benefits in the future were discounted at a 3% annual rate. PARTICIPANTS: A hypothetical 2001 US birth cohort of 3,803,295 infants was followed up from birth through death. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Net present value (net savings) and benefit-cost ratios of routine immunization. RESULTS: Routine childhood immunization with the 7 vaccines was cost saving from the direct cost and societal perspectives, with net savings of 9.9 billion dollars and 43.3 billion dollars, respectively. Without routine vaccination, direct and societal costs of diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, H influenzae type b, poliomyelitis, measles, mumps, rubella, congenital rubella syndrome, hepatitis B, and varicella would be 12.3 billion dollars and 46.6 billion dollars, respectively. Direct and societal costs for the vaccination program were an estimated 2.3 billion dollars and 2.8 billion dollars, respectively. Direct and societal benefit-cost ratios for routine childhood vaccination were 5.3 and 16.5, respectively. CONCLUSION: Regardless of the perspective, the current routine childhood immunization schedule results in substantial cost savings.

Chickenpox↗
PubMed2003

Prime-boost immunization schedules based on influenza virus and vaccinia virus vectors potentiate cellular immune responses against human immunodeficiency virus Env protein systemically and in the genitorectal draining lymph nodes.

Vaccines that elicit systemic and mucosal immune responses should be the choice to control human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections. We have previously shown that prime-boost immunizations with influenza virus Env and vaccinia virus (VV) WR Env recombinants induced an enhanced systemic CD8(+) T-cell response against HIV-1 Env antigen. In this report, we analyzed in BALB/c mice after priming with influenza virus Env the ability of two VV recombinants expressing HIV-1 Env B (VV WR Env and the highly attenuated modified VV Ankara [MVA] Env) to boost cellular immune responses in the spleen and in the lymph nodes draining the genital and rectal tracts. Groups of mice were primed by the intranasal route with 10(4) PFU of influenza virus Env and boosted 14 days later by the intraperitoneal or intranasal route with 10(7) PFU of MVA Env or VV WR Env, while the control group received two immunizations with influenza virus Env. We found that the combined immunization (Flu/VV) increased more than 60 times the number of gamma interferon-specific CD8(+) T cells compared to the Flu/Flu scheme. Significantly, boosting with MVA Env by the intraperitoneal route induced a response 1.25 or 2.5 times (spleen or genital lymph nodes) higher with respect to that found after the boost with VV WR Env. Mice with an enhanced CD8(+) T-cell response also had an increased Th1/Th2 ratio, evaluated by the cytokine pattern secreted following in vitro restimulation with gp160 protein and by the specific immunoglobulin G2a (IgG2a)/IgG1 ratio in serum. By the intranasal route recombinant WR Env booster gave a more efficient immune response (10 and 1.3 times in spleen and genital lymph nodes, respectively) than recombinant MVA Env. However, the scheme influenza virus Env/MVA Env increased four times the response in the spleen, giving a low but significant response in the genital lymph nodes compared with a single intranasal immunization with MVA Env. These results demonstrate that the combination Flu/MVA in prime-booster immunization regimens is an effective vaccination approach to generate cellular immune responses to HIV antigens at sites critical for protective responses.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1989

Durability of immunity to diphtheria, tetanus and poliomyelitis after a three dose immunization schedule completed in the first eight months of life.

Blood samples were obtained from school entrants whose primary immunization schedule had consisted of three doses of DT or DTP vaccine and three doses of OPV all given before the age of 8 months. The sera were separated and assayed for diphtheria antitoxin, tetanus antitoxin and antibodies to the three serotypes of poliovirus. The results of the assays showed that the abbreviated three dose schedule induced satisfactory immunity to all five infections until school entry and that a reinforcing dose at 18 months was unnecessary.

Antibodies, Viral↗
PubMed2003

[Childhood immunization schedule of the Spanish Association of Pediatrics 2003].

In this document the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Pediatrics provides recommendations for the immunization schedule for the 2003-2004 season. The use of inactivated poliovirus vaccine is again stressed for children of any age. Moreover, the introduction of the varicella vaccine and the pneumococcal conjugated vaccine, as well as the option of dTpa in adolescents, is highly recommended due to the availability of safe and effective products. Because of the increasing number of new vaccines in the immunization schedule, strategies with combined vaccines must be used.

Child↗
PubMed1991

[A study on immunization of polio vaccine. I. Observation on an improved immunization schedule].

This artical reports the result of serological observation on an improved immunization schedule of polio vaccine. The result shows that a good response can be obtained by immunizing an additional dose of the vaccine on the children of 18-24 month of age.serological convertion type I of neutralization antibody can be improved from 85% up to 96%, type II from 84% to 100%, and type III from 91% to 100%, with great increase of all the three types. The study proves that the additional immunization of the vaccine will effectively control over the incidence occurrence of the children who have received three doses of the vaccine within 3 years of age. An nation-wide extensive inoculation of the vaccine among the children who have received three doses of the vaccine is suggested. 81% of neonates inoculated with the vaccine within 24 hours after birth can discharge the polio-vaccine-virus through their intestinal canal and the inoculation has some effect on the improvement of the seroconversion obtained from the immunization of the three doses of the vaccine afterwards.

Antibodies, Viral↗