Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

4 results

  • Description of an Influenza Vaccination Campaign and Use of a Randomized Survey to Determine Participation Rates
  • Xuguang (Grant) Tao, Janine Giampino, Deborah A. Dooley, Frances E. Humphrey, David M. Baron, Edward J. Bernacki
  • Journal: Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 31 / Issue 2 / February 2010
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2015, pp. 151-157
  • Print publication: February 2010
  • View extract
    Objectives.

    To describe the procedures used during an influenza immunization program and the use of a randomized survey to quantify the vaccination rate among healthcare workers with and without patient contact.

    Design.

    Influenza immunization vaccination program and a randomized survey.

    Setting.

    Johns Hopkins University and Health System.

    Methods.

    The 2008/2009 Johns Hopkins Influenza Immunization Program was administered to 40,000 employees, including 10,763 healthcare workers. A 10% randomized sample (1,084) of individuals were interviewed to evaluate the vaccination rate among healthcare workers with direct patient contact.

    Results.

    Between September 23, 2008, and April 30, 2009, a total of 16,079 vaccinations were administered. Ninety-four percent (94.5%) of persons who were vaccinated received the vaccine in the first 7 weeks of the campaign. The randomized survey demonstrated an overall vaccination rate of 71.3% (95% confidence interval, 68.6%-74.0%) and a vaccination rate for employees with direct patient contact of 82.8% (95% confidence interval, 80.1%-85.5%). The main reason (25.3%) for declining the program vaccine was because the employee had received documented vaccination elsewhere.

    Conclusions.

    The methods used to increase participation in the recent immunization program were successful, and a randomized survey to assess participation was found to be an efficient means of evaluating the workforce's level of potential immunity to the influenza virus.

  • 7 - Starving the Beast: The Political Psychology of Budget Deficits
    • By Jonathan Baron, Professor of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Edward J. McCaffery, Robert C. Packard Trustee Chair in Law, Political Science and Economics, University of Southern California
  • Elizabeth Garrett, University of Southern California, Elizabeth A. Graddy, University of Southern California, Howell E. Jackson
  • Book: Fiscal Challenges
  • Published online: 23 December 2009
  • Print publication: 07 January 2008, pp 221-241
  • View extract

    Summary

    INTRODUCTION: BUDGET DEFICITS, POLITICS, AND BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS

    Budget deficits arise in part because voters support the policies that lead to them. This is so despite the fact that many voters want to avoid deficits. They favor policies that undercut their own goals, and politicians – who often have the same preferences as those who elect them – respond. Politicians (and economists) still differ on the appropriate size of the budget. When those who favor smaller government gain power, they sometimes adopt a strategy of “starving the beast,” which involves cutting taxes today with the expectation that spending cuts will follow tomorrow. The assumption is that tax cuts are easier to swallow than spending cuts, but then aversion to deficits will kick in and permit spending cuts as well.

    We present experimental evidence that many people actually do not desire tax cuts without spending cuts. Although people choose to reduce a deficit with spending cuts when they are asked in the abstract what to do, the budget cuts are not so palatable when people are asked about cuts in particular categories. When people are forced by a question to balance the budget, they still show this aversion to specific spending cuts, although they are willing to cut specific spending somewhat to close a deficit. Dedicated taxes also may help people accept both taxes and spending when these are warranted.

    Budget deficits, the subject of this volume, almost invariably have a psychological dimension. This occurs because of the confluences of two realities.