vaccines

Vaccination has prevented serious illness and death in children and adults for more than 200 years. However, conflicting statements and misleading information about the benefits and risks of vaccines are becoming more common. This is especially true on the internet and social media. Many of these conflicting statements appear to come from experts, which can lead to confusion about which information to trust. Finding accurate information about vaccines is important for people trying to make healthy decisions for themselves and their families.

Author/s:

Michael A. Incze, Jerard Z. Kneifati-Hayek

AAP Releases Its Own Childhood and Adolescent Immunization Schedule

Megan George — Mon, 23 Feb 2026 17:20:20 +0000

Date Added:

February 23, 2026

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publication Date:

February 13, 2026

URL:

AAP Releases Its Own Childhood and Adolescent Immunization Schedule

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2025.26393

Keywords

Immunization Schedule

Respiratory Syncytial Viruses

Human Papillomavirus Viruses

PMID (1):

41686462

MeSH

Immunization Schedule

Respiratory Syncytial Viruses

Human Papillomavirus Viruses

Updated 2026 childhood immunization guidelines from the AAP. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

The AAP recommends vaccines to protect children against 18 diseases. The updated CDC schedule removed routine recommendations for hepatitis A and B, COVID-19, respiratory syncytial virus, rotavirus, influenza, and meningococcal disease, instead only recommending them for certain groups at high risk of infection or based on shared clinical decision-making. The AAP continues to suggest vaccines for these diseases.

There are also differences regarding administration. For example, the new CDC schedule recommends that children aged 4 to 6 years receive both a measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and a monovalent varicella vaccine, but the AAP also supports a combination vaccine that covers all 4 viruses. And although the CDC recommends 1 dose of the human papillomavirus virus vaccine at ages 11 to 12 years, the AAP recommends 2 doses starting at ages 9 to 12 years.

Recommendations from the AAP are based on a review of vaccine safety data and the epidemiology of US diseases, the organization said. It added that insurance coverage and liability protection are expected to continue for all vaccines on the CDC schedule—even those no longer considered routine—according to federal officials.

Author/s:

Samantha Anderer

Addressing Faith-Based Concerns about Vaccination

Hope Smashey — Wed, 26 Nov 2025 02:16:02 +0000

Date Added:

November 25, 2025

Publisher:

J Am Board Fam Med .

Publication Date:

November 24, 2025

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

732-734

URL:

Addressing Faith-Based Concerns about Vaccination

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.3122/jabfm.2025.250038R1

Keywords

PMID (1):

41115758

MeSH

Spirituality

Vaccination Hesitancy

Educational Status

vaccination

vaccines

Research-based recommendations for addressing faith-based concerns about immunizations. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Religious beliefs are cited as one cause of declining vaccination rates, and religious participation has been associated with hesitancy to receive vaccines. However, many personal vaccine objections attributed to faith-based reasons are more likely matters of personal faith interpretation rather than based on the teachings or traditions of a religious community. Studies have demonstrated ways faith-based hesitancy or skepticism toward vaccines can be addressed at both the individual level and the community level. Evidence to date suggests faith-based vaccine hesitancy and may be best approached through education that addresses and accounts for the patient's spirituality, and by collaboration with organizations that are connected to patients' religious communities.

Author/s:

William E Cayley Jr

What RSV Is and Why Immunization Matters

Megan George — Tue, 04 Nov 2025 15:48:19 +0000

Date Added:

November 4, 2025

Journal/Publication:

JAMA Pediatrics Patient Page

Publication Date:

September 29, 2025

URL:

What RSV Is and Why Immunization Matters

Type:

Patient Education Materials

Format:

Poster

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamapediatrics.2025.3096

Keywords

pediatrics

RSV

respiratory synytial virus vaccines

immunizations

vaccines

PMID (1):

41021255

MeSH

infant

child

Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections

Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccines* / therapeutic use

Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccines* / administration & dosage

Respiration Disorders

Information for parents about RSV. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

View

This JAMA Pediatrics Patient Page describes respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in children and how to prevent its spread.

Author/s:

Alistair Mukondiwa, Callie L. Brown, Lindsay A. Thompson

2025 Immunization Schedules approved by ACIP

Alex Haga — Sun, 01 Dec 2024 19:18:10 +0000

Date Added:

December 1, 2024

Journal/Publication:

US Center for Disease Control and Prevention

Publication Date:

November 21, 2024

URL:

2025 Immunization Schedules approved by ACIP

Type:

Public Health Announcements

Format:

Article

Keywords

Immunization

Immunization Schedule

schedule

vaccines

MeSH

Immunization Schedule

vaccines

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.

Printable 2025 ACIP immunization schedule recommendations. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

View

The 2025 Immunization Schedules approved by ACIP and adopted by the CDC Director on October 24, 2024 are now available below.

Protection against influenza hospitalizations from enhanced influenza vaccines among older adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Alex Haga — Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:19:38 +0000

Date Added:

September 10, 2024

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Publication Date:

September 4, 2024

URL:

Protection against influenza hospitalizations from enhanced influenza vaccines among older adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1111/jgs.19176

Keywords

adjuvanted influenza vaccine

adjuvants

high‐dose trivalent influenza vaccine

influenza vaccines

PMID (1):

39230284

MeSH

Enhanced influenza vaccines are somewhat more effective than standard dose vaccines in older people. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Background
Influenza vaccines are available to help protect persons aged ≥65 years, who experience thousands of influenza hospitalizations annually. Because some influenza vaccines may work better than others, we sought to assess benefit of high-dose (HD), adjuvanted (ADJ), and recombinant (RIV) influenza vaccines (“enhanced influenza vaccines”) compared with standard-dose unadjuvanted influenza vaccines (SD) and with one another for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations among persons aged ≥65 years.

Methods
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane Library to identify randomized or observational studies published between January 1990 and October 2023 and reporting relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of HD, ADJ, or RIV for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations among adults aged ≥65 years. We extracted study data, assessed risk of bias, and conducted random-effects network meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Results
We identified 32 studies with 90 rVE estimates from five randomized and 27 observational studies (71,459,918 vaccinated participants). rVE estimates varied across studies and influenza seasons. Pooled rVE from randomized studies was 20% (95% CI −54 to 59) and 25% (95% CI −19 to 53) for ADJ and HD compared with SD, respectively; rVE was 6% (95% CI −109 to 58) for HD compared with ADJ; these differences were not statistically significant. In observational studies, ADJ, HD, and RIV conferred modestly increased protection compared with SD (rVE ranging from 10% to 19%), with no significant differences between HD, ADJ, and RIV. With enhanced vaccines combined, rVE versus SD was 18% (95% CI 3 to 32) from randomized and 11% (95% CI 8 to 14) from observational evidence. Meta-regression of observational studies suggested that those requiring laboratory confirmation of influenza reported greater benefit of enhanced vaccines.

Conclusions
HD, ADJ, and RIV provided stronger protection than SD against influenza hospitalizations among older adults. No differences in benefit were observed in comparisons of enhanced influenza vaccines with one another.

Author/s:

J M Ferdinands, L H Blanton, E Alyanak, J R Chung, L Trujillo

Child & Adolescent Immunization Schedule

Saige Blanchard — Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:28:35 +0000

Date Added:

February 28, 2022

Journal/Publication:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

URL:

Child & Adolescent Immunization Schedule

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Web Page

Keywords

child

adolescent

Immunization

Immunization Schedule

MeSH

vaccination

vaccines

Immunization Schedule

United States

The CDC’s 2022 childhood immunization recommendations. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Recommendations for Ages 18 Years or Younger, United States, 2022

Author/s:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Prevalence of Allergic Reactions After Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccination Among Adults With High Allergy Risk

Bethie Seay — Fri, 03 Sep 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

September 3, 2021

Type:

Clinical Research Results

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.22255

MeSH

referral and consultation

Surveys and Questionnaires

Algorithms

SARS-CoV-2

Highly allergic individuals can safely receive the COVID vaccine if certain precautions are taken. Anaphylaxis is very unlikely (0.7%).

View

Importance
Allergic reactions among some individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine discourage patients with allergic conditions from receiving this vaccine and physicians from recommending the vaccine.

Objective
To describe the assessment and immunization of highly allergic individuals with the BNT162b2 vaccine.

Design, Setting, and Participants
In a prospective cohort study from December 27, 2020, to February 22, 2021, 8102 patients with allergies who applied to the COVID 19 vaccine referral center at the Sheba Medical Center underwent risk assessment using an algorithm that included a detailed questionnaire. High-risk patients (n = 429) were considered “highly allergic” and were immunized under medical supervision.

Exposures
Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine.

Main Outcomes and Measures
Allergic and anaphylactic reactions after the first and second doses of BNT162b2 vaccine among highly allergic patients.

Results
Of the 429 individuals who applied to the COVID-19 referral center and were defined as highly allergic, 304 (70.9%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 52 (16) years. This highly allergic group was referred to receive immunization under medical supervision. After the first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 420 patients (97.9%) had no immediate allergic event, 6 (1.4%) developed minor allergic responses, and 3 (0.7%) had anaphylactic reactions. During the study period, 218 highly allergic patients (50.8%) received the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose, of which 214 (98.2%) had no allergic reactions and 4 patients (1.8%) had minor allergic reactions. Other immediate and late reactions were comparable with those seen in the general population, except for delayed itch and skin eruption, which were more common among allergic patients.

Conclusions and Relevance
The rate of allergic reactions to BNT162b2 vaccine, is higher among patients with allergies, particularly among a subgroup with a history of high-risk allergies. This study suggests that most patients with a history of allergic diseases and, particularly, highly allergic patients can be safely immunized by using an algorithm that can be implemented in different medical facilities and includes a referral center, a risk assessment questionnaire, and a setting for immunization under medical supervision of highly allergic patients. Further studies are required to define more specific risk factors for allergic reactions to the BNT162b2 vaccine.

Author/s:

Shavit, R., Maoz-Segal, R., Iancovici-Kidon, M.

COVID-19 Vaccine: Quick Reference Guide for Healthcare Professionals

Bethie Seay — Tue, 25 May 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

May 25, 2021

Type:

Clinical Decision Aids

MeSH

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.

delivery of health care

ACIP Reference Guide on COVID Vaccine administration.

View

The table below provides basic information on the proper storage, preparation, and administration of the currently authorized COVID-19 vaccine products in the United States. For additional information and detailed clinical guidance go to the manufacturer’s and CDC’s webpages listed.

Author/s:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Allergic Reactions Including Anaphylaxis After Receipt of the First Dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine

Devin Evans — Wed, 27 Jan 2021 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

January 27, 2021

Journal/Publication:

The Journal of the American Medical Association

Publication Date:

January 21, 2021

URL:

Allergic Reactions Including Anaphylaxis After Receipt of the First Dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2021.0600

Keywords

Pfizer–BioNTech mRNA vaccine

Anaphylaxis

Allergic reactions

PMID (1):

33475702

MeSH

A review of cases of severe allergic reactions to the SARS-2 vaccines. The reported rate is around 11 cases per million doses. There have been no deaths reported so far. James W. Mold, MD, MPH.

Free full text

View

On December 11, 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, administered as 2 doses separated by 21 days.1 Shortly after, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation for its use.2 Following implementation of vaccination, reports of anaphylaxis after the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine emerged.3 Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening allergic reaction that occurs rarely after vaccination, with onset typically within minutes to hours.4

Notifications and reports of suspected severe allergic reactions and anaphylaxis following vaccination were captured in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the national passive surveillance (spontaneous reporting) system for adverse events after immunization.5 Physicians at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) evaluated these reports and applied Brighton Collaboration case definition criteria6 to classify case reports as anaphylaxis or not anaphylaxis. Nonallergic adverse events, mostly vasovagal or anxiety-related, were excluded from the analysis. Anaphylaxis and nonanaphylaxis allergic reaction cases with symptom onset occurring later than the day after vaccination were also excluded because of the difficulty in clearly attributing allergic reactions with delayed onset after vaccination. Because the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was only available beginning December 21, 2020, this article focuses on the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

During December 14 to 23, 2020, after administration of a reported 1 893 360 first doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (1 177 527 in women, 648 327 in men, and 67 506 with sex of recipient not reported),3 CDC identified 21 case reports submitted to VAERS that met Brighton Collaboration case definition criteria for anaphylaxis (Table), corresponding to an estimated rate of 11.1 cases per million doses administered. Four patients (19%) were hospitalized (including 3 in intensive care), and 17 (81%) were treated in an emergency department; 20 (95%) are known to have been discharged home or had recovered at the time of the report to VAERS. No deaths from anaphylaxis were reported.

Author/s:

Shimabukuro, T., Nair, N.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Interim Recommendation for Use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine — United States, December 2020

Devin Evans — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

January 21, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report

Publisher:

CDC

Publication Date:

December 18, 2020

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

1922-1924

URL:

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Interim Recommendation for Use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine — United States, December 2020

Type:

Public Health Announcements

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.15585/mmwr.mm6950e2

Keywords

immunizations

Pfizer–BioNTech mRNA vaccine

PMID (1):

33332292

MeSH

Summary and conclusions of the ACIP regarding the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine based upon the RCT data available from Pfizer. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

On December 11, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine (Pfizer, Inc; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). Vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine consists of 2 doses (30 μg, 0.3 mL each) administered intramuscularly, 3 weeks apart. On December 12, 2020, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation* for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥16 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding the vaccine, ACIP employed the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework,† using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.§ The recommendation for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine should be implemented in conjunction with ACIP's interim recommendation for allocating initial supplies of COVID-19 vaccines (2). The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine under EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available.

Author/s:

Oliver, Sara E., Gargano, Julia W., Marin, Mona, Wallace, Megan, Curran, Kathryn G., Chamberland, Mary, McClung, Nancy, Campos-Outcalt, Doug, Morgan, Rebecca L., Mbaeyi, Sarah, Romero, Jose R., Talbot, H.K., Lee, Grace M., Bell, Beth P., Dooling, Kathleen

RNA vaccines: an introduction

Brian Desmarais — Mon, 16 Nov 2020 20:03:52 +0000

Date Added:

November 16, 2020

Journal/Publication:

PHG Foundation Policy Briefing

Publisher:

University of Cambridge

Publication Date:

November 1, 2020

URL:

RNA vaccines: an introduction

Type:

Patient Education Materials

Format:

Web Page

MeSH

vaccines

RNA, Messenger

An explanation of how mRNA vaccines work including their advantages and disadvantages. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Not available.

Meningococcal Vaccination: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2020

Devin Evans — Mon, 28 Sep 2020 17:30:06 +0000

Date Added:

September 28, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Recommendations and Reports

Publisher:

CDC

Publication Date:

September 25, 2020

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

1-41

URL:

Meningococcal Vaccination: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2020

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines, Public Health Announcements

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.rr6909a1

Keywords

vaccines

bacterial infections

Meningococcal disease

meningitis

bacteremia

MeSH

Meningococcal Vaccines

Meningococcal Infections

MenACWY

RPR Commentary: Updated Guidance from the ACIP on meningococcal immunization.

Free full text

View

This report compiles and summarizes all recommendations from CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for use of meningococcal vaccines in the United States. As a comprehensive summary and update of previously published recommendations, it replaces all previously published reports and policy notes. This report also contains new recommendations for administration of booster doses of serogroup B meningococcal (MenB) vaccine for persons at increased risk for serogroup B meningococcal disease. These guidelines will be updated as needed on the basis of availability of new data or licensure of new meningococcal vaccines.

ACIP recommends routine vaccination with a quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY) for adolescents aged 11 or 12 years, with a booster dose at age 16 years. ACIP also recommends routine vaccination with MenACWY for persons aged ≥2 months at increased risk for meningococcal disease caused by serogroups A, C, W, or Y, including persons who have persistent complement component deficiencies; persons receiving a complement inhibitor (e.g., eculizumab [Soliris] or ravulizumab [Ultomiris]); persons who have anatomic or functional asplenia; persons with human immunodeficiency virus infection; microbiologists routinely exposed to isolates of Neisseria meningitidis; persons identified to be at increased risk because of a meningococcal disease outbreak caused by serogroups A, C, W, or Y; persons who travel to or live in areas in which meningococcal disease is hyperendemic or epidemic; unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated first-year college students living in residence halls; and military recruits. ACIP recommends MenACWY booster doses for previously vaccinated persons who become or remain at increased risk.

In addition, ACIP recommends routine use of MenB vaccine series among persons aged ≥10 years who are at increased risk for serogroup B meningococcal disease, including persons who have persistent complement component deficiencies; persons receiving a complement inhibitor; persons who have anatomic or functional asplenia; microbiologists who are routinely exposed to isolates of N. meningitidis; and persons identified to be at increased risk because of a meningococcal disease outbreak caused by serogroup B. ACIP recommends MenB booster doses for previously vaccinated persons who become or remain at increased risk. In addition, ACIP recommends a MenB series for adolescents and young adults aged 16–23 years on the basis of shared clinical decision-making to provide short-term protection against disease caused by most strains of serogroup B N. meningitidis.

Author/s:

Mbaeyi, Sarah A., Bozio, Catherine H., Duffy, Jonathan, Rubin, Lorry, Hariri, Susan, Stephens, David S., MacNeil, Jessica R.

Meningococcal Vaccination: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2020

Devin Evans — Mon, 28 Sep 2020 17:30:03 +0000

Date Added:

September 28, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Recommendations and Reports

Publisher:

CDC

Publication Date:

September 25, 2020

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

1-41

URL:

Meningococcal Vaccination: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2020

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines, Public Health Announcements

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.rr6909a1

Keywords

vaccines

bacterial infections

Meningococcal disease

meningitis

bacteremia

MeSH

Meningococcal Vaccines

Meningococcal Infections

MenACWY

RPR Commentary: Updated Guidance from the ACIP on meningococcal immunization.

Free full text

View

Author/s:

Mbaeyi, Sarah A., Bozio, Catherine H., Duffy, Jonathan, Rubin, Lorry, Hariri, Susan, Stephens, David S., MacNeil, Jessica R.

Immunization Strategies to Span the Spectrum of Immunocompromised Adults

John Bayhi — Sat, 15 Feb 2020 20:43:08 +0000

Date Added:

February 15, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Publisher:

Elsevier, Inc.

Publication Date:

February 14, 2020

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.09.002

Keywords

MeSH

Immunogenicity, Vaccine

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.

risk assessment

This is a concise review of the principles involved in the immunization of patients who are immunocompromised. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides annual recommendations for routine adult immunizations. Many recommendations consider patient factors such as age, medical conditions, and medications that increase an individual’s risk for infection with a vaccine-preventable disease. These factors, particularly those that lead to immunocompromise, may also alter the risk-benefit ratio for live vaccines, and/or lead to decreased vaccine immunogenicity and effectiveness. The provider may need to consider alternative vaccination strategies, including higher antigen dose vaccines, adjuvanted vaccines, avoidance of live vaccines, and careful timing of vaccination to optimize safety and effectiveness in immunocompromised populations. This thematic review discusses general principles regarding immunization of adults across the spectrum of immunocompromise, examines current guidelines and studies that support them, and outlines future research needs.

Author/s:

Whitaker, JA