Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38037021›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

Having a real say: findings from first nations community panels on pandemic influenza vaccine distribution.

Kristy Crooks, Kylie Taylor, Kiara Burns, Sandy Campbell, Chris Degeling, Jane Williams, Ross Andrews, Peter Massey, Jodie McVernon, Adrian Miller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Kristy CrooksMenzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, NT, Australia. Kristy.crooks@students.cdu.edu.au.
Kylie TaylorPopulation Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Tamworth, NSW, Australia.
Kiara BurnsWuchopperen Health Service, Cairns, QLD, Australia.
Sandy CampbellFaculty of Health, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, NT, Australia.
Chris DegelingAustralian Centre for Health Engagement, Evidence and Values, University of Wollongong, School of Health and Society, Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
Jane WilliamsAustralian Centre for Health Engagement, Evidence and Values, University of Wollongong, School of Health and Society, Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
Ross AndrewsCollege of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Peter MasseyPopulation Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, NSW, Australia.
Jodie McVernonVictorian Infectious Disease Reference Laboratory Epidemiology Unit, The Royal Melbourne Hospital at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Adrian MillerOffice of Indigenous Engagement, Central Queensland University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.
Charles Darwin University · AUUniversity of Wollongong · AUAustralian National University · AUCentral Queensland University · AUHunter New England Local Health District · AUJames Cook University · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

Australian Partnership for Preparedness Research on Infectious Disease Emergencies GNT1116530
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent deliberations by Australian public health researchers and practitioners produced an ethical framework of how decisions should be made to distribute pandemic influenza vaccine. The outcome of the deliberations was that the population should be considered in two categories, Level 1 and Level 2, with Level 1 groups being offered access to the pandemic influenza vaccine before other groups. However, the public health researchers and practitioners recognised the importance of making space for public opinion and sought to understand citizens values and preferences, especially First Nations peoples.

methodsWe conducted First Nations Community Panels in two Australian locations in 2019 to assess First Nations people's informed views through a deliberative process on pandemic influenza vaccination distribution strategies. Panels were asked to make decisions on priority levels, coverage and vaccine doses.

resultsTwo panels were conducted with eighteen First Nations participants from a range of ages who were purposively recruited through local community networks. Panels heard presentations from public health experts, cross-examined expert presenters and deliberated on the issues. Both panels agreed that First Nations peoples be assigned Level 1 priority, be offered pandemic influenza vaccination before other groups, and be offered two doses of vaccine. Reasons for this decision included First Nations people's lives, culture and families are important; are at-risk of severe health outcomes; and experience barriers and challenges to accessing safe, quality and culturally appropriate healthcare. We found that communication strategies, utilising and upskilling the First Nations health workforce, and targeted vaccination strategies are important elements in pandemic preparedness and response with First Nations peoples.

conclusionsFirst Nations Community Panels supported prioritising First Nations peoples for pandemic influenza vaccination distribution and offering greater protection by using a two-dose full course to fewer people if there are initial supply limitations, instead of one dose to more people, during the initial phase of the vaccine roll out. The methodology and findings can help inform efforts in planning for future pandemic vaccination strategies for First Nations peoples in Australia.

Indexed as

Immunization ProgramsInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesAustraliaAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PeoplesHumansPandemicsVaccinationInfluenza VaccinesFirst NationsGovernancePandemic Influenza vaccinationPublic deliberationPublic health policy

Identifiers

PMID38037021
PMCPMC10691077
OpenAlexW4389193051

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.