Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36494252›Full record

ArticleVaccine2023

COVID-19 vaccine policy development in a sample of 44 countries - Key findings from a December 2021 survey of National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs).

Anna-Lea Kahn, Christoph A Steffen, Louise Henaff, Noni E MacDonald, Christopher Morgan, Ruth Faden, Folake Olayinka, Shalini Desai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Role of the National Immunisation Technical Advisory Groups in 13 European countries in the decision-making process on vaccine recommendations.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2023
    Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Anna-Lea KahnDepartment of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland. Electronic address: kahna@who.int.
Christoph A SteffenDepartment of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.
Louise HenaffDepartment of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.
Noni E MacDonaldDept of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Christopher MorganJhpiego, The Johns Hopkins University Affiliate, Baltimore, MD, USA; Nossal Institute, School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Ruth FadenBerman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Folake OlayinkaSTAR Fellows Department, Public Health Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Shalini DesaiDepartment of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

National Immunization Technical Advisory Committees (NITAGs) are tasked with the responsibility of guiding ministries of health and national immunization programmes in their policy development processes. Many NITAGs rely on evidence reviewed by the World Health Organization's (WHO) Strategic Group of Experts(SAGE) on immunization and aim to adapt WHO's recommendations to their respective contexts. This relationship took on exceptional importance since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which NITAGs have expressed a notable struggle to craft appropriate policies on population prioritization and vaccine utilization in the face of supply constraints and complex programmatic and delivery logistics. This online survey was conducted to assess the usefulness of the SAGE guidance documents for COVID-19 vaccine policies and to examine the persisting needs and challenges facing NITAGs. Results confirmed that SAGE recommendations concerning COVID-19 vaccines are easy to access, understand, and adapt. They have been found to be comprehensive and timely under the data and time constrained circumstances confronting SAGE. The Global NITAG Network (GNN) appears to be the most popular vehicle for addressing questions among high income countries, in contrast to lower income countries who favour WHO Country or Regional Offices. NITAGs place much value on interaction with other NITAGs, which requires facilitation and could benefit from increased opportunities, especially within regions. It is further noted that some NITAGs have had to tackle issues during the pandemic not typically considered by SAGE, such as supply chain logistics and vaccine demand. Learning from the COVID-19 experience offers opportunities to strengthen NITAGs and the pandemic recovery effort through the development of more concrete procedures and consideration of more varied types of data, including implementation effectiveness and uptake data. There is also an opportunity for an increasing involvement of Country Office WHO personnel to support NITAGs, while ensuring information and evidence needs of countries are adequately reflected in SAGE deliberations.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesAdvisory CommitteesCOVID-19 VaccinesHealth PolicyHumansImmunizationImmunization ProgramsPandemicsVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesCOVID-19Evidence-based decision-makingNational immunization technical advisory groupNITAGPolicy recommendationsSAGE

Identifiers

PMID36494252
PMCPMC9671626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.