ArticleRevista de saude publica2016
Evaluation of Reference Centers for Special Immunobiologicals implementation.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Experience of setting up a state pharmacovigilance committee during the COVID-19 pandemicExperiencia de la puesta en marcha de un comité estatal de farmacovigilancia durante la pandemia de COVID-19].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024Article
- Advancing the Science of Vaccine Safety During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic and Beyond: Launching an International Network of Special Immunization Services.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022Article
- Diagnosis of vaccination rooms in Brazilian primary health care centers taking part in the PlanificaSUS project, 2019.Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the Reference Centers for Special Immunobiologicals and evaluate their implementation considering formal regulations.
methodsWe conducted a program evaluation, of evaluative research type. From August 2011 to January 2012, a questionnaire was applied to the 42 Reference Centers for Special Immunobiologicals existing in the Country, approaching the structure, human resources, and developed activities dimensions. We conducted a descriptive analysis of data and used a clustering for binary data with the squared Euclidean distance, by the farthest neighbor method, to aggregate services with similar features.
resultsWe observed great diversity among the services in the three dimensions. The clustering resulted in five service profiles, named according to their characteristics. 1) Best structure: 12 Reference Centers for Special Immunobiologicals with the highest proportion of services with the minimum of rooms recommended, purpose-built vaccine refrigerators, preventive maintenance of the cold chain, and oxygen source. 2) Immunobiologicals distributor: six Reference Centers for Special Immunobiologicals that distributed more than applied immunogens; no doctor present for more than half of the working hours and no purpose-built vaccine refrigerators . 3) Incipient implementation: five Reference Centers for Special Immunobiologicals with inadequate structure, such as absence of purpose-built vaccine refrigerators, preventive maintenance of the cold chain and oxygen source; none had computer. 4) Vaccination rooms: 13 Reference Centers for Special Immunobiologicals, everyone did routine immunization, most participated in vaccination campaigns. 5) Teaching and research: six services, all inserted into teaching hospitals, developed researches and received trainees; most had doctors in more than half of the working hours.
conclusionsThe evaluation of the Reference Centers for Special Immunobiologicals implementation was based on the profiles found and considered the official regulations: services categorized as "better structure" and "teaching and research" were considered implemented; "immunobiologicals distributor" and "vaccination room" services, partially implemented, and the ones with the "incipient implementation" profile, not implemented. The results of this evaluation can contribute to the reformulation of the services, considering the current context. OBJETIVO: Descrever os Centros de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais e avaliar sua implantação considerando as regulamentações formais. MÉTODOS: Foi realizada uma avaliação de programa, tipo pesquisa avaliativa. De agosto de 2011 a janeiro de 2012, foi aplicado questionário aos responsáveis pelos 42 Centros de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais existentes no País, abordando as dimensões estrutura, recursos humanos e atividades desenvolvidas. Foi feita análise descritiva dos dados e utilizado agrupamento para dados binários com uso da distância euclidiana quadrática, pelo método do vizinho mais distante, para agregar serviços com características semelhantes. RESULTADOS: Observou-se grande diversidade entre os serviços nas três dimensões. O agrupamento resultou em cinco perfis de serviços, denominados de acordo com suas características. 1) Melhor estrutura: 12 Centros de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais com a maior proporção de serviços com o mínimo de salas preconizado, câmaras de vacinas, manutenção preventiva da rede de frio e fonte de oxigênio. 2) Dispensador de imunobiológicos: seis Centros de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais que mais dispensavam do que aplicavam imunógenos; sem médico presente por mais da metade do expediente do serviço e sem câmara de vacinas. 3) Implantação incipiente: cinco Centros de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais com estrutura inadequada, como ausência de câmaras de vacinas, de manutenção preventiva da rede de frio e de fonte de oxigênio; nenhum possuía computador. 4) Sala de vacinas: 13 Centros de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais, todos faziam imunização de rotina, a maioria participava de campanhas de vacinação. 5) Ensino e pesquisa: seis serviços, todos inseridos em hospitais de ensino, desenvolviam pesquisas e recebiam estagiários; a maioria possuía médicos em mais da metade do expediente. CONCLUSÕES: A avaliação de implantação dos Centros de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais baseou-se nos perfis encontrados e considerou as regulamentações oficiais: os serviços categorizados como "melhor estrutura" e "ensino e pesquisa" foram considerados implantados; os serviços "dispensador de imunobiológicos" e "sala de vacinas", parcialmente implantados e os do perfil "implantação incipiente", não implantados. Os resultados dessa avaliação podem contribuir para a reformulação dos serviços, considerando o contexto atual.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.