Effectiveness Review
Analytic Framework 
[PDF - 106 KB]
When starting an effectiveness review, the systematic review team develops an analytic framework. The analytic framework illustrates how the intervention approach is thought to affect public health. It guides the search for evidence and may be used to summarize the evidence collected. The analytic framework often includes intermediate outcomes, potential effect modifiers, potential harms, and potential additional benefits.
The number of studies and publications do not always correspond (e.g., a publication may include several studies or one study may be explained in several publications).
Effectiveness Review
Dickey LL, Petitti D. Patient-held minirecord to promote adult preventive care. J Fam Pract 1992;34:457– 63.
Dietrich AJ, Duhamel M. Improving geriatric preventive care through a patient-held checklist. Fam Med 1989;21:195–8.
McElligot JT, Darden PM. Are patient-held vaccination records associated with improved vaccination coverage rates? Pediatrics 2010; 125 (3): e467–72.
O’Sullivan AL, Jacobsen BS. Randomized trial of a health care program for first-time adolescent mothers and their infants. Nurs Res 1992;41: 210–5.
Stevens-Simon C, Kelly L, Brayden RM. A health passport for adolescent parents and their children. Clin Pediatr 2001;40(3):169–72.
Thomas P, Joseph TL, Menzies RI. Evaluation of a targeted immunisation program for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander infants in an urban setting. NSW Public Health Bull 2008;19(5-6):96–9.
Turner RC, Waivers LE, O’Brien K. Effect of patient-carried reminder cards on the performance of health maintenance measures. Arch Intern Med 1990;150:645–7.
Turner RC, Peden JG Jr, O’Brien K. Patient-carried card prompts vs computer-generated prompts to remind private practice physicians to perform health maintenance measures. Arch Intern Med 1994;154(17);1957–60.
Effectiveness Review
The CPSTF findings are based on studies included in the original review (search period 1980-1997) combined with studies identified in the updated search (search period 1997- February 2012). Reference lists of articles reviewed as well as lists in review articles were also searched, and members of our coordination team were consulted for additional references.
Details of the original search (1980-1997)
The following five electronic databases were searched during the original review period of 1980 up to 1997: MEDLINE, Embase, Psychlit, CAB Health, and Sociological Abstracts. The team also reviewed reference lists in articles and consulted with immunization experts. To be included in the review, a study had to:
- have a publication date of 1980–1997;
- address universally recommended adult, adolescent, or childhood vaccinations;
- be a primary study rather than, for example, a guideline or review;
- take place in an industrialized country or countries;
- be written in English;
- meet the evidence review and Guide chapter development team’s definition of the interventions; provide information on one or more outcomes related to the analytic frameworks; and
- compare a group of persons who had been exposed to the intervention with a group who had not been exposed or who had been less exposed. In addition, we excluded studies with least suitable designs for two interventions (provider reminder/recall and client reminder/recall) where the literature was most extensive.
Details of the update search (1997- February 2012)
The team conducted a broad literature search to identify studies assessing the effectiveness of Vaccine Preventable Disease interventions in improving vaccination rates. The following nine databases were searched during the period of 1997 up to February 2012: CABI, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, Soci Abs and WOS. Reference lists of articles reviewed as well as lists in review articles were also searched, and subject matter experts consulted for additional references. To be included in the updated review, a study had to:
- have a publication date of 1997- February 2012;
- evaluate vaccinations with universal recommendations;
- meet the evidence review and Guide chapter development team’s definition of the interventions;
- be a primary research study with one or more outcomes related to the analytic frameworks;
- take place in an high income country or countries;
- be written in English
- compare a group of persons who had been exposed to the intervention with a group who had not been exposed or who had been less exposed. In addition, we excluded studies with least suitable designs for two interventions (provider reminder/recall and client reminder/recall) where the literature was most extensive
Search Terms
- Immunization
- Vaccination
- Immunization Programs