Linking Time-Use Data to Explore Health Outcomes: Choosing to Vaccinate Against Influenza
To inform public health and medical decision makers concerning vaccination interventions, a methodology for merging and analyzing detailed activity data and health outcomes is presented. The objective is to investigate relationships between individual’s activity choices and their decision to receive an influenza vaccination. Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) are used to predict vaccination rates in the American Time Use Survey (ATUS) data between 2003 and 2013 by using combined socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. The correlations between the extensive (do or not do) and intensive (how much) decisions to perform activities and influenza vaccination are further explored. Significant positive and negative correlations were found between several activities and vaccination. For some activities, the sign of the correlation flips when considering either the intensive or the extensive decision. This flip occurs with highly studied activities, like smoking. Correlations between activities and vaccination can provide an additional metric for targeting those least likely to vaccinate. The methodology outlined in this paper can be replicated to explore correlation among actions and other health outcomes.
KeywordsNontraditional vaccination campaigns American Time Use Survey Influenza Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Public health Vaccination
This publication was made possible by Grant Number 1R01GM100471-01 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) at the National Institutes of Health and NSF. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of NIGMS. This work was also funded by NSF Grant No. 1414374 as part of the joint NSF-NIH-USDA Ecology and Evolution of Infectious Diseases program.
- Bayham, J., Kuminoff, N. V, Gunn, Q., & Fenichel, E. P. (2015). Measured voluntary avoidance behaviour during the 2009 A/H1N1 epidemic. In Proc. R. Soc. B (Vol. 282, p. 20150814). The Royal Society.Google Scholar
- Berry, K., Bayham, J., Meyer, S. R., & Fenichel, E. P. (2017). The Allocation of Time and Risk of Lyme: A Case of Ecosystem Service Income and Substitution Effects. Environmental and Resource Economics, 1–20.Google Scholar
- BLS. (2012). American Time Use Survey. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- CDC. (2013). Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data. Atlanta, Georgia. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/technical_infodata/surveydata.htm.
- CDC. (2016a). ACIP Recommendations. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/recs/index.html.
- CDC. (2016b). Flu Vaccination Coverage, United States, 2014-15 Influenza Season. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/flu/fluvaxview/coverage-1415estimates.htm.
- Culotta, A., Kumar, N. R., & Cutler, J. (2015). Predicting the Demographics of Twitter Users from Website Traffic Data. In Proceedings of the 29th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 72–78).Google Scholar
- DHHS. (2012). Healthy People 2020. Retrieved from www.healthypeople.gov.
- Dredze, M., Broniatowski, D. A., Smith, M. C., & Hilyard, K. M. (2016). Understanding Vaccine Refusal: Why We Need Social Media Now. American Journal of Preventive Medicine (Vol. 50). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2015.10.002.
- Jacob, V., Chattopadhyay, S. K., Hopkins, D. P., Morgan, J. M., Pitan, A. A., Clymer, J. M., & Force, C. P. S. T. (2016). Increasing Coverage of Appropriate Vaccinations: A Community Guide Systematic Economic Review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 50(6), 797–808.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Merrill, R. M., & Beard, J. D. (2009). Influenza vaccination in the United States, 2005–2007. Medical Science Monitor Basic Research, 15(7), PH92-PH100.Google Scholar
- Mostow, S. R. (2001). Use of alternative sites to administer influenza vaccine improves acceptance by both physicians and patients. In International Congress Series (Vol. 1219, pp. 703–706). Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Mullahy, J. (1998). It’ll only hurt a second? Microeconomic determinants of who gets flu shots. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Postema, A. S., & Breiman, R. F. (2000). Adult Immunization Programs in Nontraditional Settings: Quality Standards and Guidance for Program Evaluation: A Report of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report: Recommendations and Reports, vii-13.Google Scholar
- R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.r-project.org/.
- Reed, C., Kim, I. K., Singleton, J. A., Chaves, S. S., Flannery, B., Finelli, L., … Jernigan, D. (2014). Estimated influenza illnesses and hospitalizations averted by vaccination–United States, 2013-14 influenza season. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 63(49), 1151–1154.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Stockwell, M. S., Kharbanda, E. O., Martinez, R. A., Vargas, C. Y., Vawdrey, D. K., & Camargo, S. (2012). Effect of a text messaging intervention on influenza vaccination in an urban, low-income pediatric and adolescent population: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 307(16), 1702–1708.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ward, C. J. (2014). Influenza vaccination campaigns: is an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure? American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 6(1), 38–72.Google Scholar
- Weitzel, K. W., & Goode, J. V. (1999). Implementation of a pharmacy-based immunization program in a supermarket chain. Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association (1996), 40(2), 252–256.Google Scholar