What Matters to Parents Regarding Immunization of Their Children: Systematic Analysis of Expert Advice to Parents in an Internet Forum.

BACKGROUND: World Health Organization announced vaccine hesitancy among the top 10 threats to global health in 2019. While the number of persons looking for information on health topics on the internet is increasing, information regarding immunization on the internet is often inaccurate and misleading. We aimed to determine the kind of information parents seek on the internet for decision-making regarding immunizations for their children. METHODS: We investigated threads of an internet vaccine forum, where parents can get personalized advice from a vaccine expert, with regard to the types of vaccines and content of the questions. One thousand six hundred twenty consultations (4896 questions) between September 2001 and December 2018 were examined. Of these, 1386, including 4000 questions, were related to immunizations of the user's child. Date of consultation, user gender and country of residence, age of the child; kind of vaccine(s), and topic of the question according to the following categories were analyzed: Vaccination schedule, safety, effectiveness, necessity, vaccine application, serology, exchangeability of different vaccine types and brands, maternally acquired immunity, reimbursement, and vaccine product related. RESULTS: Most questions concerned infants (47.7%) and regarded measles-component (28.9%) and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis combination vaccines (25.3%). Parents were mainly interested in vaccination schedule (33.8%), safety (26.6%), and effectiveness (17.8%) of vaccines. Over time, safety-related questions decreased, and effectiveness related questions increased. Disease outbreaks or newly introduced vaccines and vaccinations temporarily raised interest. From 2011 onwards, most questions regarded measles-component vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings will assist health care professionals and policy makers in preparing targeted information campaigns to address questions and counteract vaccine hesitancy.

Comparison of Five TSH-Receptor Antibody Assays in Graves' disease: results from an observational pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis and relapse prediction in Graves' disease influences treatment. We assessed the abilities of four TSH-receptor antibody tests [TRAb] and one cyclic adenosine monophosphate bioassay to predict relapse of Graves' disease. METHODS: Observational study investigating patients presenting with Graves' disease at a Swiss hospital endocrine referral center or an endocrine outpatient clinic. Main outcomes were diagnosis and relapse of Graves' disease after stop of anti-thyroid drugs. We used Cox regression to study associations of TRAb levels with relapse risk and calculated c-statistics [AUC] to assess discrimination. Blood draws took place as close as possible to treatment initiation. RESULTS: AUCs ranged from 0.90 (TSAb Biossay by RSR) to 0.97 (IMMULITE TSI by Siemens). Highest sensitivity (94.0%) was observed for IMMULITE TSI and RSR TRAb Fast, while the greatest specificity (97.9%) was found with the EliA anti-TSH-R (by Thermo Fisher). In Cox regression analysis comparing the highest versus the lower quartiles, the highest hazard ratio [HR] for relapse was found for BRAHMS TRAK (by Thermo Fisher) (2.98, 95% CI 1.13-7.84), IMMULITE TSI (2.40, 95% CI 0.91-6.35), EliA anti-TSH-R (2.05, 95% CI 0.82-5.10), RSR Fast TRAb (1.80, 95% CI 0.73-4.43), followed by RSR STIMULATION (1.18, 95% CI 0.46-2.99). Discrimination analyses showed respective AUCs of 0.68, 0.65, 0.64, 0.64, and 0.59. CONCLUSION: The assays tested had good diagnostic power and relapse risk prediction with few differences among the new assays. Due to the small sample size and retrospective design with possible selection bias, our data need prospective validation.

External validation of the GREAT score to predict relapse risk in Graves' disease: results from a multicenter, retrospective study with 741 patients.

CONTEXT: First-line treatment in Graves' disease is often done with antithyroid agents (ATD), but relapse rates remain high making definite treatment necessary. Predictors for relapse risk help guiding initial treatment decisions. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to externally validate the prognostic accuracy of the recently proposed Graves' Recurrent Events After Therapy (GREAT) score to predict relapse risk in Graves' disease. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We retrospectively analyzed data (2004-2014) of patients with a first episode of Graves' hyperthyroidism from four Swiss endocrine outpatient clinics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relapse of hyperthyroidism analyzed by multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: Of the 741 included patients, 371 experienced a relapse (50.1%) after a mean follow-up of 25.6 months after ATD start. In univariate regression analysis, higher serum free T4, higher thyrotropin-binding inhibitor immunoglobulin (TBII), younger age and larger goiter were associated with higher relapse risk. We found a strong increase in relapse risk with more points in the GREAT score from 33.8% in patients with GREAT class I (0-1 points), 59.4% in class II (2-3 points) with a hazard ratio of 1.79 (95% CI: 1.42-2.27, P < 0.001) and 73.6% in class III (4-6 points) with a hazard ratio of 2.24 (95% CI: 1.64-3.06, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this retrospective analysis within a large patient population from a multicenter study, the GREAT score shows good external validity and can be used for assessing the risk for relapse in Graves' disease, which influence the initial treatment decisions.