This Article  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Lawrence O. Gostin, JD
Georgetown University Law Center Washington, DC

Zita Lazzarini, JD, MPH
Harvard School of Public Health Boston, Mass

JAMA. 1996;275(17):1313.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.

—Clarification of the ideas presented in our article on IIS by Dr Orenstein and colleagues is most welcome. The CDC's National Immunization Program supported our study and contributed richly to its intellectual development. Orenstein and colleagues raise 2 central issues in the conceptualization of IIS—implementation of IIS at the state, as opposed to the national level, and the adequacy of privacy protection for children and their families.

Orenstein and colleagues make a strong case for state data systems to accommodate local solutions and preferences. While state-based data systems achieve many benefits, variability in state rules can render them less effective from a public health perspective. The flow of immunization information is rarely restricted to the state in which it is generated. Families move from state to state, and the ability to track children and meet their medical needs wherever they live remains an important feature of IIS. Managed . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?