Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28664193›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2017

Knowledge, practice and approaches of health professionals to adverse events following immunization and their reporting in Albania.

Irsida Mehmeti, Erida Nelaj, Artan Simaku, Eugena Tomini, Silva Bino

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Health Workers' Approach Toward Adverse Events following Immunization - An Insight From Madhya Pradesh.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine
    Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Irsida MehmetiDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences/Catholic University Our Lady of Good Counsel, Str. Dritan Hoxha, Tirana, Albania.
Erida NelajControl of Infectious Diseases Department/Institute of Public Health, Str. Aleksander Moisiu, nr 80, Tirana, Albania.
Artan SimakuControl of Infectious Diseases Department/Institute of Public Health, Str. Aleksander Moisiu, nr 80, Tirana, Albania.
Eugena TominiControl of Infectious Diseases Department/Institute of Public Health, Str. Aleksander Moisiu, nr 80, Tirana, Albania.
Silva BinoControl of Infectious Diseases Department/Institute of Public Health, Str. Aleksander Moisiu, nr 80, Tirana, Albania.
Institute of Public Health · ALCatholic University Our Lady of Good Counsel · AL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Albania, the reporting of an adverse events following immunization (AEFI) is done not only by immunization providers but also from clinicians providing clinical treatment of AEFI in health posts, health centers and private or public hospitals. The AEFI reporting system in Albania has started in 2001 with the establishment of National Regulatory Authority of Vaccines in the Institute of Public Health. The most important problems of passive surveillance systems include underreporting, deficiency and inaccuracy of information. A structured questionnaire containing 68 questions constructed from immunization experts constituted the study tool. The questionnaire addressed health professionals working at child consultant's facilities and primary health centers in the district of Tirana. There were a total of 102 health professional interviewed. The majority of the respondents working at health centers in the district of Tirana in general, had poor knowledge levels on AEFI surveillance. The lowest score were received in knowledge about the role of different stakeholders involved in AEFI surveillance. The number of years practicing the profession did not influence in the total score of "practice and attitude toward reporting and managing an AEFI". Although the majority of health care professionals have encountered an AEFI during their practice (72/102, 70,5%), only half of them have never reported an AEFI (37/102, 36,2%). Barriers to reporting included lack of interest, unclear definition of AEFI and lack of awareness of what to report. Nevertheless, the main reason for not reporting was because a respondent thought he or she had not observed an AEFI in the last years (44,1%). Majority of the respondents did not have any training about AEFI (68,6%, 70/102). From this study it is concluded that it is necessary to develop training and educational programs in order to increase awareness of all health professionals involved in child health toward reporting of adverse events following immunization. It is necessary to build feedback systems to give information on AEFI. This study shows the influence of knowledge, perceptions and practices of health care workers in the surveillance of adverse events following immunization. Thus, information generated from this study might be valuable for the public health regulators to generate new guidelines about AEFI surveillance and update existing information.

Indexed as

Evidence-based medicineHealth professionMedicineNursingPediatricsPublic healthVaccines

Identifiers

PMID28664193
PMCPMC5480270
OpenAlexW2701018641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.