Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34376308›Full record

ArticleVaccine2021

From program suspension to the pandemic: A qualitative examination of Australia's vaccine pharmacovigilance system over 10 years.

Anastasia Phillips, Samantha Carlson, Margie Danchin, Frank Beard, Kristine Macartney

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Anastasia PhillipsThe University of Sydney, School of Public Health, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia; National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance, Westmead, New South Wales 2145, Australia; Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Nedlands, Western Australia 6009, Australia. Electronic address: aphi7007@uni.sydney.edu.au.
Samantha CarlsonWesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Nedlands, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Margie DanchinVaccine and Immunisation Research Group (VIRGo), Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Department of General Medicine, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Department of Paediatrics and School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Frank BeardThe University of Sydney, School of Public Health, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia; National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance, Westmead, New South Wales 2145, Australia.
Kristine MacartneyNational Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance, Westmead, New South Wales 2145, Australia; The University of Sydney, Discipline of Child and Adolescent Health, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AURoyal Children's Hospital · AUThe Kids Research Institute Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2010, the Australian seasonal influenza vaccination program for children under 5 years of age was suspended due to an unexpected increase in fever and febrile convulsions causally associated with one particular influenza vaccine brand. A subsequent national review made seven recommendations to improve vaccine pharmacovigilance. Ten years on, in advance of implementing the COVID-19 immunisation program, we evaluated views on the capacity of Australia's vaccine pharmacovigilance system to promptly detect, examine and communicate a signal.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted between July and October 2020 with individuals with expertise in vaccine safety in Australia using an interview guide informed by key Australian and international frameworks. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used to code data using a deductive approach.

resultsInterviews with seventeen participants enabled six themes to be identified. Participants described improvement and significant innovation within Australia's vaccine pharmacovigilance system over the decade since 2010, particularly through establishment of a new active, cohort event monitoring system using short message service surveys. Participants thought Australia had a good foundation for COVID-19 vaccine safety surveillance; implementation of the COVID-19 immunisation program was seen as a potential driver for ongoing enhancement through: a) improved integration of the active surveillance and spontaneous reporting systems, and; b) development of population-level active surveillance, including through data linkage. Transparent communication was considered essential to address the unprecedented challenges of COVID-19 and broader vaccine safety concerns.

conclusionsVaccine safety experts in Australia convey confidence in the innovative pharmacovigilance systems implemented over the past 10 years. While Australia has a multifaceted system incorporating both active surveillance and spontaneous reporting systems, COVID-19 vaccine implementation represents an opportunity to enhance current systems and to develop new, systematic approaches to vaccine pharmacovigilance that should make both a local and global contribution.

Indexed as

COVID-19Influenza VaccinesAustraliaChildChild, PreschoolCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansPandemicsPharmacovigilanceSARS-CoV-2VaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesInfluenza VaccinesActive surveillanceCOVID-19 vaccinesPharmacovigilanceQualitative researchVaccine safety

Identifiers

PMID34376308
PMCPMC8445694
OpenAlexW3191152922

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.