Files and links (1)
Published, Version of Record (VoR)Open Access (License Unspecified), Open
Journal article
Partisan Polarization of Childhood Vaccination Policies, 1995–2020
American journal of public health (1971), v 112(10), pp 1471-1479
01 Oct 2022
Featured in Collection : UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
Abstract
Objectives. To examine trends in partisan polarization of childhood vaccine bills and the impact of polarization on bill passage in the United States. Methods. We performed content analysis on 1497 US state bills (1995-2020) and obtained voting returns for 228 legislative votes (2011-2020). We performed descriptive and statistical analyses using 2 measures of polarization. Results. Vote polarization rose more rapidly for immunization than abortion or veterans' affairs bills. Bills in 2019-2020 were more than 7 times more likely to be polarized than in 1995-1996 (odds ratio [OR] 5 7.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.54,13.99). Bills related to public health emergencies were more polarized (OR = 1.76; 95% CI = 1.13, 2.75). Sponsor polarization was associated with 34% lower odds of passage (OR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.42,1.03). Conclusions. State lawmakers were more divided on vaccine policy, but partisan bills were less likely to pass. Bill characteristics associated with lower polarization could signal opportunities for future bipartisanship. Public Health Implications. Increasing partisan polarization could alter state-level vaccine policies in ways that jeopardize childhood immunization rates or weaken responsiveness during public health emergencies. Authorities should look for areas of bipartisan agreement on how to maintain vaccination rates.
Metrics
Details
- Title
- Partisan Polarization of Childhood Vaccination Policies, 1995–2020
- Creators
- Kevin Estep - Kevin Estep is with the Department of Cultural and Social Studies, Health Administration and Policy Program, and the Department of Medical Humanities, Creighton University, Omaha, NE. Annika Muse is with the Department of Biology, Creighton University. Shannon Sweeney is with the Department of Cultural and Social Studies, Health Administration and Policy Program, Creighton University. Neal D. Goldstein is with the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA.Annika Muse - Kevin Estep is with the Department of Cultural and Social Studies, Health Administration and Policy Program, and the Department of Medical Humanities, Creighton University, Omaha, NE. Annika Muse is with the Department of Biology, Creighton University. Shannon Sweeney is with the Department of Cultural and Social Studies, Health Administration and Policy Program, Creighton University. Neal D. Goldstein is with the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA.Shannon Sweeney - Kevin Estep is with the Department of Cultural and Social Studies, Health Administration and Policy Program, and the Department of Medical Humanities, Creighton University, Omaha, NE. Annika Muse is with the Department of Biology, Creighton University. Shannon Sweeney is with the Department of Cultural and Social Studies, Health Administration and Policy Program, Creighton University. Neal D. Goldstein is with the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA.Neal Goldstein - Drexel UniversitySean Sweeney - Policy, Organization, and Leadership
- Publication Details
- American journal of public health (1971), v 112(10), pp 1471-1479
- Publisher
- American Public Health Association
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Policy, Organization, and Leadership; Epidemiology and Biostatistics
- Web of Science ID
- WOS:000909300600034
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-85138446048
- Other Identifier
- 991019173467904721
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
InCites Highlights
Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:
- Collaboration types
- Domestic collaboration
- Web of Science research areas
- Public, Environmental & Occupational Health