Show simple item record

2024-11-20Zeitschriftenartikel
How do national immunization technical advisory groups assess and use evidence: Findings from the SYSVAC survey
dc.contributor.authorPilic, Antonia
dc.contributor.authorHenaff, Louise
dc.contributor.authorSteffen, Christoph
dc.contributor.authorWichmann, Ole
dc.contributor.authorPiechotta, Vanessa
dc.contributor.authorHarder, Thomas
dc.date.accessioned2026-02-09T13:25:30Z
dc.date.available2026-02-09T13:25:30Z
dc.date.issued2024-11-20none
dc.identifier.other10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126538
dc.identifier.urihttp://edoc.rki.de/176904/13280
dc.description.abstractNational immunization technical advisory groups (NITAGs) develop evidence-based vaccination recommendations. Systematic reviews (SRs) are important tools in that process, but conducting them is very resource-intensive. Given the considerable number of immunization-related SRs published and to minimize duplication of effort, a more practical approach for NITAGs is to use existing SRs. Among multiple initiatives and resources to strengthen NITAGs, the freely accessible SYSVAC registry supports NITAGs in identifying suitable SRs when developing vaccination recommendations. Additional SYSVAC courses provide step-by-step training on how to use SRs. This cross-sectional survey was conducted online and involved 108 participants globally. The aim was to explore NITAGs user experience with evidence retrieval, to assess impact and use of the SYSVAC resources and training needs. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire. Most of the respondents were > 45 years old (75.9%) and represented 50 NITAGs from all six World Health Organization (WHO) regions. In total, 13/50 NITAGs (26.0%) had ease accessing full text publications. The preferred data sources to search for evidence were peer reviewed literature via PubMed and the WHO website (Strategic Advisory Group of Experts – SAGE – on Immunization). When developing vaccination recommendations, respondents stated using SRs mostly conducted by SAGE, other institutions or NITAGs (83.2%), recommendations of other countries (79.4%) and primary studies (73.8%). Respondents from 35 NITAGs stated to use the SYSVAC registry to search for evidence, leading to ≥69 recommendations being developed by NITAGs globally with its support. Aside existing SYSVAC courses on SR use, there was great interest in training on SR use in the development of vaccination recommendations. Our survey gathered information on evidence use and training needs. Survey results serve as a starting point to improve support of NITAGs in developing recommendations.eng
dc.language.isoengnone
dc.publisherRobert Koch-Institut
dc.rights(CC BY 3.0 DE) Namensnennung 3.0 Deutschlandger
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/de/
dc.subjectNational Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAG)eng
dc.subjectEvidence-based medicineeng
dc.subjectVaccination recommendationeng
dc.subjectMethodologyeng
dc.subjectSystematic revieweng
dc.subjectVaccinationeng
dc.subject.ddc610 Medizin und Gesundheitnone
dc.titleHow do national immunization technical advisory groups assess and use evidence: Findings from the SYSVAC surveynone
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:0257-176904/13280-4
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionnone
local.edoc.container-titleVaccinenone
local.edoc.type-nameZeitschriftenartikel
local.edoc.container-typeperiodical
local.edoc.container-type-nameZeitschrift
local.edoc.container-publisher-nameElsevier B.V.none
local.edoc.container-reportyear2024none
local.edoc.container-firstpage1none
local.edoc.container-lastpage7none
dc.description.versionPeer Reviewednone

Show simple item record