TY - JOUR
T1 - Characteristics and practices of national immunisation technical advisory groups in Europe and potential for collaboration, April 2014
AU - VENICE III NITAG Survey Group
AU - Takla, A.
AU - Wichmann, Ole
AU - Carrillo-Santisteve, P.
AU - Cotter, Suzanne
AU - Lévy-Bruhl, D.
AU - Paradowska-Stankiewicz, Iwona
AU - Valentiner-Branth, Palle
AU - D'Ancona, F.
AU - Schmid, Daniela
AU - Wiedermann, Ursula
AU - Mertens, Veerle
AU - Sabbe, Martine
AU - Van Damme, Pierre
AU - Filipova, Radosveta
AU - Kojouharova, Mira
AU - Koliou, Maria
AU - Castkova, Jitka
AU - Fabianova, Katerina
AU - Kyncl, Jan
AU - Kadai, Martin
AU - Kerbo, Natalia
AU - Korppi, Matti
AU - Nohynek, Hanna
AU - Tuija, Leino
AU - Floret, Daniel
AU - Konstantopoulos, Andreas
AU - Stavrou, Theodora
AU - Gudnason, Thorolfur
AU - Connolly, Kevin
AU - Iannazzo, Stefania
AU - Perevoscikovs, Jurijs
AU - Abegg, Marina Jamnicki
AU - Gargasienė, Greta
AU - Razmuvienė, Daiva
AU - Sant’Angelo, Victoria Farrugia
AU - Fenech, Tanya Melillo
AU - Houweling, Hans
AU - de Melker, Hester
AU - van Rossum, Leo
AU - Feiring, Berit
AU - Nøkleby, Hanne
AU - Freitas, Graca
AU - Fernandes, Teresa
AU - Chicin, Gratiana
AU - Stanescu, Aurora
AU - Mikas, Jan
AU - Hudecova, Helena
AU - Vitek, Marta Grgic
AU - Kraigher, Alenka
AU - Pebody, Richard
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). All rights reserved.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - In many countries, national vaccination recommendations are developed by independent expert committees, so-called national immunisation technical advisory groups (NITAG). Since the evaluation of vaccines is complex and resource-demanding, collaboration between NITAGs that evaluate the same vaccines could be beneficial. We conducted a cross-sectional survey among 30 European countries in February 2014, to explore basic characteristics and current practices of European NITAGs and identify potential modes and barriers for collaboration. Of 28 responding countries, 26 reported to have a NITAG or an equivalent expert group. Of these, 20 apply a systematic approach in the vaccine decision-making process, e.g. by considering criteria such as country-specific disease epidemiology, vaccine efficacy/effectiveness/ safety, health economics, programme implementation/logistics or country-specific values/preferences. However, applied frameworks and extent of evidence review differ widely. The use of systematic reviews is required for 15 of 26 NITAGs, while results from transmission modelling and health economic evaluations are routinely considered by 18 and 20 of 26 NITAGs, respectively. Twenty-five countries saw potential for NITAG-collaboration, but most often named structural concerns, e.g. different NITAG structures or countries’ healthcare systems. Our survey gathered information that can serve as an inventory on European NITAGs, allowing further exploration of options and structures for NITAG collaboration.
AB - In many countries, national vaccination recommendations are developed by independent expert committees, so-called national immunisation technical advisory groups (NITAG). Since the evaluation of vaccines is complex and resource-demanding, collaboration between NITAGs that evaluate the same vaccines could be beneficial. We conducted a cross-sectional survey among 30 European countries in February 2014, to explore basic characteristics and current practices of European NITAGs and identify potential modes and barriers for collaboration. Of 28 responding countries, 26 reported to have a NITAG or an equivalent expert group. Of these, 20 apply a systematic approach in the vaccine decision-making process, e.g. by considering criteria such as country-specific disease epidemiology, vaccine efficacy/effectiveness/ safety, health economics, programme implementation/logistics or country-specific values/preferences. However, applied frameworks and extent of evidence review differ widely. The use of systematic reviews is required for 15 of 26 NITAGs, while results from transmission modelling and health economic evaluations are routinely considered by 18 and 20 of 26 NITAGs, respectively. Twenty-five countries saw potential for NITAG-collaboration, but most often named structural concerns, e.g. different NITAG structures or countries’ healthcare systems. Our survey gathered information that can serve as an inventory on European NITAGs, allowing further exploration of options and structures for NITAG collaboration.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979900331&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2807/1560-7917.es2015.20.9.21049
DO - 10.2807/1560-7917.es2015.20.9.21049
M3 - Article
C2 - 25764188
AN - SCOPUS:84979900331
SN - 1025-496X
VL - 20
JO - Eurosurveillance
JF - Eurosurveillance
IS - 9
ER -