Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35623910›Full record

ReviewHealth policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2022

Prioritization of COVID-19 vaccination. The added value of the "VALIDATE" approach.

Pietro Refolo, Bart Bloemen, Barbara Corsano, John Grin, Iñaki Gutierrez-Ibarluzea, Bjørn Hofmann, Wija Oortwijn, Laura Sampietro-Colom, Lars Sandman, Gert Jan van der Wilt and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

11 authors.

Pietro RefoloFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Department of Healthcare Surveillance and Bioethics, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: pietro.refolo@unicatt.it.
Bart BloemenDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Barbara CorsanoFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Department of Healthcare Surveillance and Bioethics, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
John GrinUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Iñaki Gutierrez-IbarluzeaBasque Foundation for Health Innovation and Research (BIOEF), Barakaldo, Spain; Basque Office for HTA (Osteba), Barakaldo, Spain.
Bjørn HofmannDepartment of Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Gjøvik, Norway.
Wija OortwijnDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Laura Sampietro-ColomAssessment of Innovations and New Technologies Unit, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Lars SandmanDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, National Centre for Priorities in Health, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Gert Jan van der WiltDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Dario SacchiniFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Department of Healthcare Surveillance and Bioethics, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prioritization of COVID-19 vaccines is one of the most relevant topics in the current pandemic emergency. Prioritization decisions are political decisions that are value-laden, and as such of ethical nature. Despite the clear political and ethical nature of this topic, prioritization decisions are often interpreted and presented as scientific decisions. The aim of this article is twofold. First, we aim to show critical points that characterize certain pandemic vaccination plans from the ethical viewpoint using four dimensions (problem definitions, incorporation of different perspectives, context, and specification). The four dimensions were drawn from findings of the European project "VALIDATE" (VALues In Doing Assessments of healthcare TEchnologies", https://validatehta.eu). Second, we aim to reframe the issue about prioritization itself in the light of the four dimensions mentioned. Our conclusion is that policy-problem definitions, incorporation of different perspectives, contextual considerations and specification of moral principles seem to be common critical points of some vaccination plan documents. The European project "VALIDATE" seems to be able to provide a useful and profitable approach to address many of these critical points.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansPandemicsVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesEthicsItalian COVID-19 vaccination programPrioritizationScienceVaccine

Identifiers

PMID35623910
PMCPMC9121636

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.