Search

MyChild Solution is an innovative Electronic Immunisation Register (EIR) reliant on Smart Paper Technology, thereby eliminating the need for electronic devices and internet connectivity at the point-of-care. The goal of this study is to characterise the quality of routine immunisation data generated using MyChild Solution compared to data obtained through the conventional health management information system (HMIS) used in The Gambia. We used the World Health Organization's (WHO) Data Quality Review (DQR) Toolkit to evaluate MyChild Solution's data quality in the 19 health facilities across two regions implementing MyChild Solution in The Gambia at the time of the evaluation. We evaluated all applicable data quality metrics as well as additional metrics of interest, including the incidence of recording errors, the incidence of incomplete indicator level data, and implausible dates. Where possible, we compared results to those of the conventional HMIS. Both MyChild Solution and the conventional HMIS produced 100% complete and timely data in their reference years. Both systems had no moderate or extreme outliers and showed the expected Penta 1 to Penta 3 dropout direction. However, the proportion of verification factors that are not acceptable was higher in the conventional HMIS. MyChild Solution was found to near perfectly (99.98%) digitise scanned documents. These and other data quality indicators evaluated demonstrate that MyChild Solution produces high quality data with high completeness, timeliness, and consistency compared to the conventional HMIS system. MyChild Solution produces high quality data as per the DQR Toolkit metrics and other metrics of interest of interest. The more internally consitent data produced through MyChild Solution compared to the conventional HMIS demonstrates its potential for supporting data-driven decision-making in immunisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presented the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of Rabies vaccines excerpted from the Rabies vaccines: WHO position paper – April 2018 published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] This position paper replaces the 2010 WHO position paper on rabies vaccines [2] . It presents new evidence in the field of rabies and the use of rabies vaccines, focussing on programmatic feasibility, simplification of vaccination schedules and improved cost-effectiveness. The recommendations concern the 2 main immunization strategies, namely vaccination for post-exposure prophylaxis and vaccination for pre-exposure prophylaxis. In the context of post-exposure prophylaxis, recommendations are also provided on the use of rabies immunoglobulins. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation tables. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO’s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines were discussed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) in October 2017; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/october/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Seasonal influenza has a significant impact on global public health each year, especially in older adults 65 years of age and above. This paper presents the evolution of high-dose influenza vaccine and the quantity as well as quality of evidence on this vaccine. Its introduces other peer-reviewed manuscripts included in this supplement covering the benefits high-dose influenza vaccine over ten consecutive influenza seasons. The development of the high-dose influenza vaccine represents an important step in the evolution of influenza vaccines, offering an advancement in prevention of influenza and a step in encouraging healthy aging in older adults. A video summary of the article can be accessed via the Supplementary data link at the end of this article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of measles vaccines excerpted from the WHO position paper on Measles vaccines: WHO position paper – April 2017, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper replaces the 2009 WHO position paper on measles vaccines [2]. The position paper summarizes the most recent developments in the field of measles and includes removal of introduction criteria for the routine second dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV2), guidance on when to vaccinate infants from 6 months of age, and guidance on re-vaccination of HIV-infected children receiving highly active anti-retroviral therapy (HAART). Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of measles vaccines were discussed by SAGE in November 2013, October 2015 and October 2016; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2013/november/presentations%5fbackground%5fdocs/en/ , www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2015/october/presentations%5fbackground%5fdocs/en/ and www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2016/october/presentations_background_docs/en/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines excerpted from the Cholera vaccines: WHO position paper, August 2017 , published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record (Cholera vaccine, 2017) [1] . This position paper replaces the 2010 WHO position paper on cholera vaccines (Cholera vaccine, 2010) [2] . It incorporates the most recent evidence on cholera vaccination and provides revised recommendations on the target populations for cholera immunization. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines were discussed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) in April 2017; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/April/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of diphtheria vaccines excerpted from the Diphtheria vaccines: WHO position paper, August 2017 , published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record (Diphtheria vaccine, 2017) [1] . This position paper replaces the 2006 WHO position paper on diphtheria vaccine (Diphtheria vaccine, 2006) [2] . The position paper incorporates recent evidence on diphtheria and provides revised recommendations on the optimal number of doses and timing of diphtheria vaccination. In view of the widespread use of combination vaccines, it provides guidance on the alignment of vaccination schedules for different antigens included in routine childhood immunization programmes. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of diphtheria vaccines were discussed by SAGE in April 2017; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/april/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of hepatitis B vaccines excerpted from the Hepatitis B vaccines: WHO position paper, July 2017 , published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record (Hepatitis B vaccines, 2017) [1]. This position paper replaces the May 2009 WHO position paper on hepatitis B vaccines (Hepatitis B vaccines, 2009) [2]. The position paper gives updated information on hepatitis B vaccines and their storage, transport and deployment. The recommendations concern the target groups for vaccination and the appropriate schedules. In particular, the recommendations stress the importance of vaccination of all infants at birth as the most effective intervention for the prevention of hepatitis B virus-associated disease worldwide. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of hepatitis B vaccines were discussed by SAGE in October 2016; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2016/October/presentations_background_docs/en/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When applying for funding, researchers must demonstrate their productivity. For most funding organizations, a key measure of productivity is the number of papers published. The road to publication is rarely straightforward; few journals provide practical guidance to researchers who are struggling to publish their data. Here, we outline the sections of a research paper and describe practical steps in each part of the publication process as an aid to newer authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To develop and evaluate a paper-based point-of-care HPV serology test to determine if an individual has received two or more HPV immunizations. Methods The paper-based immunoassay was constructed using a nitrocellulose lateral flow strip with adsorbed HPV16 virus-like particles serving as the capturing moiety. Three capture zones containing virus-like particles were placed in series to allow for visual discrimination between high and low HPV16 plasma antibody concentrations. A plasma separation membrane was used to allow whole blood to be applied directly to the assay. All reagents were dried on glass fiber pads during device fabrication and were rehydrated with buffer at the time of use. A pilot study consisting of 35 subjects with a history of zero, one, two or three HPV vaccines was conducted to evaluate the immunoassay. The completed paper-based immunoassays were scanned for visual interpretation by three researchers who were blinded to the true results and separately evaluated quantitatively using MATLAB. Results For the 28 tests valid for analysis, fifteen subjects reported receiving two or more HPV vaccines, three reported receiving one, and ten reported having no HPV vaccinations. The paper-based immunoassays for all fifteen subjects who reported having received two or more HPV vaccines were judged positive by all researchers. Twelve of the thirteen tests from individuals reporting one or zero vaccinations were deemed negative by all observers. One test from an unvaccinated individual was judged positive by two out of three reviewers. Quantitatively, all tests were correctly separated between the two groups. Conclusions We successfully designed and tested a HPV serology test amenable to the point-of-care. The device showed promising results in a pilot study for discriminating between those who received two or more HPV vaccinations and those who did not. Furthermore, this device offers a platform for producing other semi-quantitative point-of-care serological tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract This article presented the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of Typhoid vaccines excerpted from the Typhoid vaccines: WHO position paper – March 2018 published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record (World Health Organization, 2018) [1]. This position paper replaces the 2008 WHO position paper on typhoid vaccines (WHO, 2008) [2]. It re-emphasizes the importance of vaccination to control typhoid fever and presents the WHO recommendations on the use of a new generation of typhoid conjugate vaccines. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation tables. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines were discussed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) in October 2017; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/October/presentations_background_docs/en/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines excerpted from the WHO position paper on Human papillomavirus vaccines: WHO position paper, May 2017, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper replaces the 2014 WHO position paper on HPV vaccines [2] . The position paper focuses primarily on the prevention of cervical cancer, but also considers the broader spectrum of cancers and other diseases preventable by HPV vaccination. It incorporates recent developments concerning HPV vaccines, including the licensure of a nonavalent (9-valent) vaccine and recent data on vaccine effectiveness, and provides guidance on the choice of vaccine. New recommendations are proposed regarding vaccination strategies targeting girls only or both girls and boys, and vaccination of multiple birth cohorts [3] . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of HPV vaccines were discussed by SAGE in October 2016; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2016/october/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presented the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of on Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine excerpted from the BCG vaccines: WHO position paper – February 2018 published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper replaces the 2004 WHO position paper on Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine [2] and the 2007 WHO revised BCG vaccination guidelines for infants at risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection [3] . It incorporates recent developments in the tuberculosis (TB) field, provides revised guidance on the immunization of children infected with HIV, and re-emphasizes the importance of the birth dose. This position paper also includes recommendations for the prevention of leprosy. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation tables. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO’s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines were discussed by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) in October 2017; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2017/october/presentations_background_docs/en/ [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of dengue vaccine excerpted from the WHO position paper on dengue vaccine – September 2018, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper replaces the July 2016 WHO position paper concerning the first licensed dengue vaccine, CYD-TDV [2]. The position paper presents new evidence that became available in November 2017. A retrospective analysis of data from clinical trials, using a new serological assay classified trial participants according to their dengue serostatus prior to receipt of the first vaccine dose. The analysis revealed an excess risk of severe dengue in seronegative vaccine recipients compared to seronegative non-vaccinated individuals, while confirming long-term protection in seropositive individuals [3]. The paper provides revised guidance on dengue vaccination strategies from a population health perspective. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of dengue vaccine CYD-TDV were discussed by SAGE in April 2018; evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2018/april/presentations_background_docs/en/ [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of rabies vaccines excerpted from the recently published Rabies vaccines: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper entitled Rabies vaccines WHO position paper published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in December 2007. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables which assess the quality of scientific evidence for key conclusions are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization, or SAGE. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations for the use of vaccines against Bordetella pertussis from the WHO position paper on Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper—August 2015, recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record (Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 2015;90(August(35)):433–60). This position paper summarizes the most recent developments in the field of pertussis disease and its prevention by vaccination. It includes the WHO position on the choice of Pertussis vaccine as well as on the use of additional strategies, particularly vaccination during pregnancy, for prevention of early infant mortality. This document replaces the first WHO position paper on vaccines against disease caused by Pertussis published in 2010 (Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 2010;85(October(40)):385–400) and incorporates the revised guidance on the choice of pertussis vaccines published in July 2014 (Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 2014;89(July(30)):337–44). Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2014 and April 2015 meetings. The evidence presented at the meetings can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) updated recommendations on the use of meningococcal vaccines excerpted from the WHO position paper on Meningococcal A conjugate vaccine: updated guidance, February 2015, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . A position paper on meningococcal vaccines was published in 2011 and its recommendations remain valid [2] . This update adds to the previous recommendations specifically concerning routine immunization of infants and young children in the African meningitis belt with meningococcal A conjugate vaccine. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of the Meningococcal A conjugate vaccine were discussed by SAGE in October 2014; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2014/october/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations for the use of varicella and herpes zoster vaccination from the WHO position paper on varicella and herpes zoster vaccines – June 2014, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the use of varicella and herpes zoster vaccines. The current document replaces the position paper on the use of varicella vaccines published in 1998 [2] . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2014 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of fractional doses of yellow fever vaccines excerpted from the “Yellow fever vaccine: WHO position on the use of fractional doses – June 2017, Addendum to Vaccines and vaccination against yellow fever WHO: Position Paper – June 2013 ″, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1,2] . This addendum to the 2013 position paper pertains specifically to use of fractional dose YF (fYF) vaccination (fractional dose yellow fever vaccination refers to administration of a reduced volume of vaccine dose, which has been reconstituted as usual per manufacturer recommendations) in the context of YF vaccine supply shortages beyond the capacity of the global stockpile. The current WHO position on the use of yellow fever (YF) vaccine is set out in the 2013 WHO position paper on vaccines and vaccination against YF and those recommendations are unchanged. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of Yellow Fever vaccines were discussed by SAGE in October 2016; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2016/October/presentations_background_docs/en/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) evidence and recommendations for the use of yellow fever (YF) vaccination from “Vaccines and vaccination against yellow fever: WHO Position Paper – June 2013” published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the use of YF vaccination, in particular that a single dose of YF vaccine is sufficient to confer sustained life-long protective immunity against YF disease. A booster dose is not necessary. The current document replaces the position paper on the use of yellow fever vaccines and vaccination published in 2003 [2] . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2013 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of Japanese Encephalitis (JE) vaccines excerpted from the WHO position paper on Japanese Encephalitis vaccines recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This updated position paper on JE vaccines replaces the 2006 position paper on this subject [2] ; it focuses on new information concerning the availability, safety, immunogenicity and effectiveness of JE vaccines and the duration of protection they confer. Recent data on global prevalence and burden of disease caused by JE and cost-effectiveness considerations regarding JE vaccination are also summarized. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its October 2014 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of hepatitis E vaccine excerpted from the WHO position paper on hepatitis E vaccines – May 2015 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . The current document is the first WHO position paper on hepatitis E vaccination and focuses primarily on the available evidence concerning the only hepatitis E vaccine that is currently licensed. The position paper gives consideration to the epidemiological features of the disease and assesses the use of the vaccine for public health benefits. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its October 2014 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations for the use of vaccines against diseases caused by human papillomaviruses (HPV) from the WHO position paper on Human papillomavirus vaccines: WHO position paper – October 2014, recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper summarizes the most recent developments in the field of HPV vaccines and the WHO position on HPV vaccine schedules in females. This document replaces the first WHO position paper on vaccines against diseases caused by HPV published in 2009 [2] . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2014 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article presents the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations on the use of pneumococcal vaccines excerpted from the Pneumococcal vaccines WHO position paper – 2012 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record . The current document replaces the position paper on the use 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine published in 2007 . Incorporating the most recent developments in the field of pneumococcal vaccines this position paper focuses on the currently available 10-valent and 13-valent conjugate vaccines and their introduction and use in national immunization programmes. It also deals with the 23-valent polysaccharide vaccine, though in less detail than provided in the April 2008 position paper which remains valid . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of scientific evidence for a few key conclusions. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines worldwide. This paper reflects the recommendations of the WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. Recommendations on the use of pneumococcal vaccines were discussed by SAGE at its meetings in November 2006 (conjugate vaccine) and April 2008 (polysaccharide vaccine) and most recently in November 2011. Evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of vaccines against tick-borne encephalitis excerpted from the recently published Vaccines against tick-borne encephalitis: WHO position paper. This is the first WHO position paper on the use of tick-borne encephalitis. It was published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in June 2011. In this paper, footnotes provide a limited number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of scientific evidence for a few key conclusions; a more comprehensive list of references is offered in the Background document on vaccines and vaccination against tick-borne encephalitis available at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/6_TBE_backgr_18_Mar_net_apr_2011.pdf. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2011 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of cholera vaccines excerpted from the recently published Cholera vaccines: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper on Cholera vaccines published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in April 2001. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables which assess the quality of scientific evidence for key conclusions are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization (SAGE). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of hepatitis B vaccines excerpted from the recently published Hepatitis B vaccines: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper on hepatitis B vaccines published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in July 2004. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables assessing the level of scientific evidence are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health-policy matters, WHO is issuing a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with the current WHO position concerning their use in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s strategic Advisory Group of experts on immunization. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations for pain mitigation at the time of vaccination from the WHO position paper on reducing pain at the time of vaccination: WHO position paper—September 2015, recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper summarizes the evidence and integrates information pertaining to the reduction of pain, distress and fear during immunization across all age groups. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact, and on vaccination-related policy questions particularly concerning the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes. They summarize essential background information and conclude with the current WHO position. This position paper addresses a cross-cutting issue which is relevant for all injectable vaccines and reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2015 meeting. The evidence presented at the meetings can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) evidence and recommendations for the use of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination from the WHO position paper on H. influenzae type b (Hib) Vaccination – July 2013 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the inclusion of Hib vaccines in all national immunization programmes, recent developments in the field and the potential of different Hib immunization schedules to further reduce morbidity and mortality. The current document replaces the position paper on the use of Hib vaccines published in 2006 [2]. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2013 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of pertussis vaccines excerpted from the recently published Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper entitled Pertussis vaccines: WHO position paper published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in January 2005. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables which assess the quality of scientific evidence for key conclusions are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization, or SAGE. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This article presents the WHO recommendations on the use of polio vaccines excerpted from the recently published Polio vaccines and polio immunization in the pre-eradication era: WHO position paper. This document replaces the WHO position paper entitled Introduction of inactivated poliovirus vaccine into oral poliovirus vaccine-using countries published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record in July 2003. Footnotes to this paper provide a limited number of core references; their abstracts as well as a more comprehensive list of references may be found at http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/positionpapers/en/index.html. Grading tables which assess the quality of scientific evidence for key conclusions are also available through this link and are referenced in the position paper. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This updated paper reflects the recent recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization, or SAGE. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract:: This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) recommendations onthe use of hepatitis A vaccineexcerpted from the WHO position paper on hepatitis A vaccines – June 2012 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. The current document replaces the position paper on the use of hepatitis A vaccines published in 2000 [2] and incorporates the most recent developments in the field with particular consideration to changes in the epidemiological features of hepatitis A infection in several countries, increased supply of hepatitis A vaccines, and new evidence on their public health benefits. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of scientific evidence for a few key conclusions. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated positionpapers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO''s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO''s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its November 2011 and April 2012 meetings. Evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of polio vaccine excerpted from the WHO position paper on polio vaccines – March 2016, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1] . This position paper on polio vaccines replaces the 2014 WHO position paper [2] . The position paper summarizes the WHO position on the introduction of at least one dose of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) into routine immunization schedules as a strategy to mitigate the potential risk of re-emergence of type 2 polio following the withdrawal of Sabin type 2 strains from oral polio vaccine (OPV) [3] . Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO’s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This position paper reflects the global switch from trivalent to bivalent OPV which took place in April 2016. Recommendations on the use of polio vaccines have been discussed on multiple occasions by SAGE, most recently in October 2016; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the large majority of parents in the U.S. vaccinate their children according to the recommended immunization schedule, some parents have refused or delayed vaccinating, often citing safety concerns. In response to public concern, the U.S. Institute of Medicine (IOM) evaluated existing research regarding the safety of the recommended immunization schedule. The IOM concluded that although available evidence strongly supported the safety of the currently recommended schedule as a whole, additional observational research was warranted to compare health outcomes between fully vaccinated children and those on a delayed or alternative schedule. In addition, the IOM identified the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) as an important resource for conducting this research. Guided by the IOM findings, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) commissioned a White Paper to assess how the VSD could be used to study the safety of the childhood immunization schedule. Guided by subject matter expert engagement, the resulting White Paper outlines a 4 stage approach for identifying exposure groups of undervaccinated children, presents a list of health outcomes of highest priority to examine in this context, and describes various study designs and statistical methods that could be used to analyze the safety of the schedule. While it appears feasible to study the safety of the recommended immunization schedule in settings such as the VSD, these studies will be inherently complex, and as with all observational studies, will need to carefully address issues of confounding and bias. In light of these considerations, decisions about conducting studies of the safety of the schedule will also need to assess epidemiological evidence of potential adverse events that could be related to the schedule, the biological plausibility of an association between an adverse event and the schedule, and public concern about the safety of the schedule. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) evidence and recommendations for the use of polio vaccination from the WHO position paper on polio vaccines - January 2014 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the introduction of at least one dose of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) into routine immunization schedules as a strategy to mitigate the potential risk of re-emergence of type 2 polio following the withdrawal of Sabin type 2 strains from oral polio vaccine (OPV). The current document replaces the position paper on the use of polio vaccines published in 2010 [2]. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its November 2013 meeting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sustainable financing for immunization refers to the sufficient and predictable allocation and use of resources to support the achievement of immunization goals within the framework of overall health financing. The Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) agenda spells out four important focus areas needed for sustainable financing: (1) ensuring sufficient and predictable resources, (2) making optimal use of resources, (3) aligning partnerships, and (4) supporting sustainable transitions from external assistance. This paper summarizes the evidence and proposes interventions under each area. While immunization is one of the best investments and justifies public financing, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the worst economic recession since the Great Depression and threatens countries' ability to mobilize funding to ensure continuity and access to essential services, including immunization. Strategies for ensuring adequate resources differ by income group but include raising more revenues, reprioritizing the budget towards health, and ensuring that health resources favor Primary Health Care (PHC) and immunization. In low- and lower-middle income countries, support from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, which channels the largest amount of external financing, will remain important, but some lower-middle income countries will need to prepare for transition. Countries benefitting from the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) are also experiencing a transition from GPEI financing to domestic and other external financing. This paper outlines ways in which countries can improve the use of domestic and external resources to better incentivize high-quality PHC and immunization services and align immunization programs with health sector reforms. While governments must lead, collective action from development partners, the private sector, and civil society is needed to promote health system financing systems that ensure that the world is better prepared for future outbreaks and pandemics, while reinforcing the IA2030 vision and making progress towards universal health coverage and the Sustainable Development Goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe diarrhea in infants and young children. Live attenuated vaccines can lead to horizontal transmission with the risk of vaccine-derived disease in contacts. Transmission of pentavalent human-bovine reassortant rotavirus vaccine (RV5) strains leading to clinical disease was not well evaluated in the pivotal clinical trials, and only a few case reports have been described in the literature. We performed a systematic literature review to investigate secondary transmission of RV5 strains to unvaccinated subjects globally. We searched Embase, Medline for English papers, CNKI, Wan Fang for Chinese papers, and other resources (i.e., conference papers with full text) from January 2005 to June 2021. Eligibility criteria for inclusion were original articles based on non-interventional studies (case-control studies, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies) using RV5 strain transmission as outcomes. Other study or publication types were excluded, such as pre-clinical studies, interventional studies and case reports. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used, and study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies and the JBI checklist for cross-sectional studies to assess the risk of bias. The search generated 2,089 articles in total. Seven articles met all inclusion criteria, including six cohort studies and one cross-sectional study. All studies underwent quality assessment and complied with the quality criteria of the NOS or JBI checklist, respectively. Overall, none of the seven studies identified RV5 vaccine-type transmission to an unvaccinated population, in either hospitals or nurseries under a close contact environment. One study reported that 1% of unvaccinated infants had gastrointestinal symptoms, but all symptoms were attributed to other clinical conditions. We found no evidence of horizontal transmission of RV5 strains to unvaccinated infants in a context of a limited amount and the descriptive nature of the identified studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most influenza vaccines are generally safe, but influenza vaccines can cause rare serious adverse events. Some adverse events, such as fever and febrile seizures, are more common in children than adults. There can be differences in the safety of vaccines in different populations due to underlying differences in genetic predisposition to the adverse event. Live attenuated vaccines have not been studied adequately in children under 2 years of age to determine the risks of adverse events; more studies are needed to address this and several other priority safety issues with all influenza vaccines in children. All vaccines intended for use in children require safety testing in the target age group, especially in young children. Safety of one influenza vaccine in children should not be extrapolated to assumed safety of all influenza vaccines in children. The low rates of adverse events from influenza vaccines should not be a deterrent to the use of influenza vaccines because of the overwhelming evidence of the burden of disease due to influenza in children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of dengue vaccine excerpted from the WHO position paper on dengue vaccine published in the Weekly epidemiological Record in July 2016 (Dengue vaccine: WHO position paper, 2016) [1] . The current document is the first WHO position paper on dengue vaccination and focuses primarily on the available evidence concerning the only dengue vaccine to have been registered by National Regulatory Authorities. The position paper gives consideration to the epidemiological features of the disease and assesses the potential use of the vaccine for public health benefits. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO’s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of the WHO’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. Recommendations on the use of this dengue vaccine were discussed by SAGE in April 2016; evidence presented at that SAGE meeting can be accessed at: http://www.who .int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Proposed a Multi Criteria Decision Making based Reverse Vaccinology model for predicting Bacterial Protective Antigens. • The proposed model tested on extracted physicochemical features from bacterial protein sequence. • Applied four strategies of Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique and Edited Nearest Neighbour to handle the data imbalance problem. • Consider MCDM-based TOPSIS and CRITIC methods for order preference with soft and hard ranking model. Reverse vaccinology (RV) is a significant step in sensible vaccine design. In recent years, many machine learning (ML) methods have been used to improve RV prediction accuracy. However, there are still issues with prediction accuracy and programme accessibility in ML-based RV. This paper presents a supervised ML-based method to classify bacterial protective antigens (BPAgs) and identify the model(s) that consistently perform well for the training dataset. Six ML classifiers are used for testing with physiochemical features extracted from a comprehensive training dataset. Selecting the best performing model from different performance metrics (accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and AUC-ROC) has not been easy, because all the metrics has the same importance to predict BPAgs. To fix this issue, we propose a soft and hard ranking model based on multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach for selecting the best performing ML method that classifies BPAgs. First, our proposed model uses homologous proteins (positive and negative samples) from Protegen and Uniprot databases. Second, we applied four strategies of Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique and Edited Nearest Neighbour (SMOTE-ENN) to handle the data imbalance problem and train the model using ML methods. Third, we consider MCDM-based technique for order preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS) method integrated with soft and hard ranking model. The entropy is used to obtain weighted evaluation criteria for ranking the models. Our experimental evaluations show that the proposed method with best performing models (Random Forest and Extreme Gradient Boosting) outperforms compared to existing open-source RV methods using benchmark datasets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The MMR vaccine was included in the official vaccination schedule in Spain in 1981. Currently, most women of childbearing age are vaccinated and have not been naturally infected. Several studies have shown that vaccinated women have a lower antibody concentration than that achieved after natural infection, and a shorter duration of transplacentally acquired antibodies in their children. The objective of this study was to determine the antibody titer in mothers and their infants at birth and throughout the first year of life under current epidemiological circumstances. Single-center, observational, descriptive and prospective study conducted between October 2013 and December 2014. One sample of serum and another of a dried blood spot on filter paper were taken from each mother. Dried blood spot samples on filter paper were taken from the children at birth, and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. In all the samples, levels of antibodies to the measles, rubella and mumps viruses were measured using standardized quantitative assays. 146 mother-child pairs were included. 78.4%, 86.9% and 67.1% of mothers had antibodies to measles, rubella and mumps, respectively. A decrease in the antibody titer in children was observed after 3 months, and no antibodies against the three diseases were detected by the age of 6 months. Comparisons revealed no statistically significant differences between the antibody titers of children of mothers born before or after 1981 during the first year of their life. The rapid loss of transplacentally acquired antibodies against measles, rubella and mumps, under current epidemiological conditions, suggests that bringing the MMR vaccination forward to 9 months might be justified. Larger population studies are needed to confirm these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) evidence and recommendations for the use of rotavirus vaccination from the WHO position paper on rotavirus vaccines – January 2013 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the inclusion of rotavirus vaccines in all national immunization programmes and recent developments in the field, in particular the potential of rotavirus vaccines to further reduce mortality by employing more flexible immunization schedules. The current document replaces the position paper on the use of rotavirus vaccines published in 2007 [2]. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This paper reflects the recommendations of WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization. These recommendations were discussed by SAGE at its April 2012 meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A global shift to bivalent mRNA vaccines is ongoing to counterbalance the diminishing effectiveness of the original monovalent vaccines due to the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants, yet substantial variation in the bivalent vaccine effectiveness (VE) exists across studies and a complete picture is lacking. We searched papers evaluating absolute or relative effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 BA.1 type or BA.4/5 type bivalent mRNA vaccines on eight publication databases published from September 1st, 2022, to November 8th, 2023. Pooled VE against Omicron-associated infection and severe events (hospitalization and/or death) was estimated in reference to unvaccinated, ≥2 original monovalent doses, and ≥ 3 original monovalent doses. From 630 citations identified, 28 studies were included, involving 55,393,303 individuals. Bivalent boosters demonstrated higher effectiveness against symptomatic or any infection for all ages combined, with an absolute VE of 53.5 % (95 % CI: –22.2–82.3 %) when compared to unvaccinated and relative VE of 30.8 % (95 % CI: 22.5–38.2 %) and 28.4 % (95 % CI: 10.2–42.9 %) when compared to ≥ 2 and ≥ 3 original monovalent doses, respectively. The corresponding VE estimates for adults ≥ 60 years old were 22.5 % (95 % CI: 16.8–39.8 %), 31.4 % (95 % CI: 27.7–35.0 %), and 30.6 % (95 % CI: −13.2–57.5 %). Pooled bivalent VE estimates against severe events were higher, 72.9 % (95 % CI: 60.5–82.4 %), 57.6 % (95 % CI: 42.4–68.8 %), and 62.1 % (95 % CI: 54.6–68.3 %) for all ages, and 72.0 % (95 % CI: 51.4–83.9 %), 63.4 % (95 % CI: 41.0–77.3 %), and 60.7 % (95 % CI: 52.4–67.6 %) for adults ≥ 60 years old, compared to unvaccinated, ≥2 original monovalent doses, and ≥ 3 original monovalent doses, respectively. The bivalent boosters demonstrated superior protection against severe outcomes than the original monovalent boosters across age groups, highlighting the critical need for improving vaccine coverage, especially among the vulnerable older subpopulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The vaccine coverage against human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination remains low in France. The objective of this study was to study adolescent perceptions by comparing boys and girls, in order to build effective school-based interventions. This paper presents a cross-sectional study in French middle school pupils. They completed online questionnaires on their knowledge and attitudes toward the HPV vaccine, HPV vaccination status, their intention, reasons to vaccinate or not to vaccinate, and psychological antecedents of vaccination. A structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis was used to test the hypothesized model. The participants are 818 pupils aged from 12 to 16 years (M age = 13.78). Most pupils were in the pre-contemplative stage (62.7 % of boys and 40.8 % of girls). SEM analysis indicated that the relationship between the level of HPV knowledge, the representations of vaccines in general, and vaccine intention was mediated by attitudes towards the HPV vaccine among both boys and girls. These findings reveal a high percentage of boys who do not feel concerned by the HPV vaccine and highlight the need to consider the psychological antecedents of vaccination in general in addition to the specific attitudes to the HPV vaccine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Country ownership is one of the four guiding principles for the Immunization Agenda 2030. • There is little practical guidance on what country ownership is and how to operationalize it. • Measles and rubella programs are used to illustrate country ownership in operation. • Five elements of country ownership - commitment, coordination, capacity, community participation, and accountability - are described. • Our work is a useful guide for immunization program strategy development. Country-owned, as opposed to donor-driven, is a principle within the development sector that recognizes the centrality of countries' leadership, systems, and resources in executing programs and achieving sustainable development. In alignment with this notion, the Immunization Agenda 2030 was developed with country ownership as one of four core principles of the ambitious ten-year plan. This means that the success of immunization programs, including those with eradication and elimination goals such as polio, measles, and rubella, and those with broader equity goals to "leave no one behind" on immunization, would be largely driven by country systems. In this paper we deconstruct country ownership into five operational principles: commitment, coordination, capacity, community participation, and accountability. Through this lens, we illustrate how two countries, Nepal and Nigeria, have exemplified country ownership in their measles and rubella elimination programs and we infer the ways in which country ownership drives system performance and sustains program efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]