Vaccine uptake determinants in The Netherlands

Alies van Lier · Jan van de Kassteele · Pieter de Hoogh · Ingrid H. Drijfhout · Hester E. de Melker

50 citations0/0 files storedEuropean Journal of Public Health

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy Intramuscular injections and effects Immune responses and vaccinations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Combining existing data on background characteristics with data from immunization registers might give insight into determinants of vaccine uptake, which can help to improve communication strategies and invitation policy of National Immunisation Programmes. METHODS: The study population consisted of children born in 2005 as registered in the Dutch national immunization register Præventis. A hierarchical logistic regression model was used to quantify associations between individual vaccination status and proxy variables for ethnic background (individual level), socio-economic status (postcode level) and religious objection to vaccination (municipal level). RESULTS: Most children whose both parents were not born in The Netherlands had a somewhat lower full vaccine uptake, for example, children whose both parents were born in Turkey [odds ratio = 0.7 (0.6-0.8)] or in Morocco [odds ratio = 0.8 (0.7-0.9)]. The partial uptake was also relatively high (3.7-8.0%) compared with children whose both parents were born in The Netherlands (3.1%). Municipalities with higher religious objection to vaccination and postcode areas with lower socio-economic status were also associated with a lower full uptake. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high vaccination coverage in The Netherlands, we were able to identify determinants of vaccine uptake by combining existing data sets. This might be an example for other countries. The impact of ethnic background and socio-economic status is not as well known in The Netherlands as the effect of religious objection to vaccination, and deserves more attention. Groups that have a relatively high partial uptake deserve special attention because they do not reject vaccination in general.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 50 citations exist upstream.

References

2010Factors underlying parental decisions about combination childhood vaccinations including MMR: A systematic review 2011Religious subgroups influencing vaccination coverage in the Dutch Bible belt: an ecological study 2012Præventis, the immunisation register of the Netherlands: a tool to evaluate the National Immunisation Programme 2004Why do parents hesitate to vaccinate their children against measles, mumps and rubella?

Cited by

2019Social inequities in vaccination coverage among infants and pre-school children in Europe and Australia – a systematic review 2017Predictors of coverage of the national maternal pertussis and infant rotavirus vaccination programmes in England 2024Understanding the health system barriers and enablers to childhood MMR and HPV vaccination among disadvantaged, minority or underserved populations in middle- and high-income countries: a systematic review 2016Knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and practices of construction workers towards tetanus vaccine in Northern Italy 2017Socioeconomic factors influencing childhood vaccination in two northern Italian regions 2024The role of religion and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in England 2020MenACWY vaccination campaign for adolescents in the Netherlands: Uptake and its determinants

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.