Search

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of tetanus toxoid (TT) vaccines excerpted from the WHO position paper on tetanus vaccines - February 2017, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper replaces the May 2006 WHO position paper on tetanus vaccines (Tetanus vaccines: WHO position paper, 2006). The position paper summarizes the recent developments in the field of tetanus prevention and provides revised guidance on the optimal timing of recommended tetanus vaccine booster doses. 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 TT-containing vaccines (TTCVs) were discussed by SAGE in October 2016; evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2016/october/presentations_background_docs/en/., (Copyright © 2017 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of malaria vaccine excerpted from the WHO position paper on malaria vaccine published in the Weekly epidemiological Record in January 2016 [1]. The current document is the first WHO position paper on malaria vaccination and focuses primarily on the available evidence concerning the only malaria vaccine having received a positive regulation assessment from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) [2]. 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 joint recommendation of the WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization and the Malaria Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC). These recommendations were discussed by SAGE and MPAC at the October 2015 SAGE meeting. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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/., (Copyright © 2017 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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/., (Copyright © 2017 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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/., (Copyright © 2018 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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/., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

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., (Copyright © 2016 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2016 The World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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. 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. 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 © 2014. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

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. Evidence presented at the meeting can be accessed at http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html., (Copyright © 2014 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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 © 2013. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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 © 2013 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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 © 2010. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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 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 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 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]

Objectives: Trust in governments and public institutions as a determinant of public health outcomes has gained increased attention since the COVID-19 pandemic. Provided historically low confidence in vaccines in Japan, investigating the role of trust in information sources and actual COVID-19 vaccination uptake behavior will be invaluable for future vaccine promotion policymaking. Therefore, the objective of this study was to elucidate the determinants of COVID-19 vaccination uptake and evaluate the relationship between trust in different information sources and COVID-19 vaccination behavior in Japan., Methods: For this study, we leveraged a longitudinal series of web-based surveys of 19,174 individuals in Japan conducted between 2021 and 2022 which asked questions regarding a wide range of sociodemographic and psychographic characteristics related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Determinant analysis for vaccination (at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine) was conducted via multiple logistic regression, and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated., Results: After adjustment for sociodemographic determinants of vaccine uptake, aggregate trust in the systems and institutions of vaccine approval (OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.30-1.56), and trust in information about the COVID-19 pandemic coming from government sources (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.12-1.44) were found to be consistently powerful predictors of COVID-19 vaccination. Trust in media sources including traditional media (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.07-1.36), and the internet (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.66-0.89) had significant and opposing effects., Conclusions: Our findings support the broader hypothesis that trust in governments and public health institutions remains a powerful determinant for COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Japan. We also found that vaccination decision-making is a multifactorial process that includes the synthesis of trust in public institutions and media, and its interaction with psychosocial determinants such as prosociality and health literacy. We hope to apply this study's findings towards future vaccine programs for contagious diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Most studies examining factors associated with pediatric influenza (flu) and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination uptake focus on parental demographics. We examined whether the childhood cultural health environment (CHE) of parents (measured by self-reported regular attendance at doctor and dentist visits during childhood) was associated with flu and COVID-19 vaccination of their children. Using 2023 survey data from 397 US parents and causal inference methods, we estimated the average causal effect of parental CHE on flu vaccination rates (0.16 [95 % confidence interval: 0.06,0.27]) and COVID-19 (0.14 [95 % confidence interval: 0.04,0.24]), indicating that if all parents had attended regular doctor/dentist visits as children, flu and COVID-19 vaccination rates in children would be 16 % and 14 % higher, respectively, than if none had. Our findings suggest that early life exposure to medical and dental care has significant and lasting effects on the health of individuals and families., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier India Pvt Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Autonomous motivation is considered a powerful driver of health behaviour, but less is known about the specific roles played by basic needs. Drawing on the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, this research examined basic needs as a motivational determinant of vaccination. We hypothesized that satisfaction of basic needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness) has both a direct and an indirect effect (through trust in science and government) on vaccine hesitancy. Two studies (Study 1: N = 968 French and British; Study 2, pre-registered: N = 716 Americans) tested our hypotheses and compared vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals using multigroup structural equation models. We found positive direct (in both studies) and indirect (in Study 1) effects of autonomy satisfaction on vaccine acceptance. In contrast, competence satisfaction was directly and indirectly, via science mistrust, related to vaccine hesitancy, particularly among non-vaccinated people. Competence satisfaction also indirectly reduced the intention to vaccinate in both studies. We found no impact of relatedness. Complementing previous work on self-determination theory, our research demonstrates the importance of considering the distinct roles of basic needs. Moreover, we highlight that increasing autonomy and science trust may be an efficient strategy to improve vaccine acceptance and vaccination, even among reluctant individuals., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The smallpox vaccine developed by Jenner in 1798 was successfully introduced in France in 1800 with the support of Napoleon Bonaparte. The medals and tokens (coin-like medals) issued to encourage early-day vaccination activities are described in the context of the changing political situation in that country. In 1800 a private society of subscribers, led by the Duke of La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt was created, along with a Vaccine Committee charged with evaluating the safety and efficacy of vaccination before deciding if vaccination should be extended to the entire population. The Vaccine Committee published a positive report in 1803, and in 1804, the Ministry of the Interior established the "Society for the extinction of smallpox in France by means of the propagation of the vaccine". The creation of the Society made smallpox vaccination an official activity of the empire, facilitating collaboration between government agencies. The vaccine institution, established by Napoleon in 1804, continued its functions until 1820 when the Royal Academy of Medicine was created and took over those functions. This case exemplifies the collaboration that was needed between science and politics to rapidly bring the recently developed smallpox vaccine to the needed population., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Psychological distress has been associated with dampened antibody production following vaccination. Questions remain, however, about whether psychological distress influences vaccine response uniformly across the lifespan, and whether changes in distress result in changes in antibody production across the same period., Methods: Participants (N = 148; M age  = 32.2 years, SD = 19.7, range = 12-80 years) took part in consecutive vaccine studies during the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 influenza seasons. Each influenza season, they reported on their depressive symptoms, provided blood samples, and received the standard influenza vaccine. Participants then provided a second blood sample one month later. Antibody titers were examined pre- and post-vaccination., Results: Analyses examined both within-season and across-season effects of depressive symptoms, age, and their interaction on vaccine response. Within-season analyses revealed that age predicted antibody response during both seasons (2017-2018 and 2018-2019). Neither depressive symptoms nor the interaction with age were associated with antibody response to vaccination within either season. Across the two seasons, age significantly moderated the association between change in depressive symptoms and change in antibody production. For people who were 48 or older, increases in depressive symptoms across the two seasons were associated with a less robust response to the vaccine in the second season relative to the first season. For people younger than 48, changes in depressive symptoms were not significantly related to changes in antibody production., Conclusions: These findings highlight the important role of mental health for older adults' vaccine response, which could have clinical relevance for protection against disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Social events may provide important cues that influence the sense of reality, including the perception that conspiracy theories are plausible. Using longitudinal panel data collected in the UK from March 2020 to December 2021, this study aims to identify whether social events influenced the strength of the association between conspiracy mentality and vaccine intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Consistent with previous research, the conspiracy mentality was a significant predictor of vaccine intentions across three-time points, but also that conspiracy mentality measured in March 2020 predicted that participants were more hesitant to the vaccines in December 2020. The primary finding was that different social events moderated the strength of the correlation between conspiracy mentality and vaccine intentions within similar participants. Conspiracy mentality became more vital to evaluate COVID-19 vaccines in December 2020, when the vaccination program was about to commence., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Crown Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Vaccine mandates are controversial, and people vary widely in their preferences to support or reject vaccine mandates. For some, vaccine mandates represent a commitment to reduce harm and support public health. For others, vaccine mandates are viewed as a threat to individual freedom and a violation of personal choice. This manuscript investigated support for a COVID-19 vaccine mandate among COVID-19-vaccinated individuals and identified differences by demographic characteristics and COVID-19 experience., Methods: Cross-sectional surveys were given to COVID-19-vaccinated individuals at a vaccination clinic in South Texas in the U.S. with the goal of identifying attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions about COVID-19 vaccination and willingness to support a COVID-19 vaccination mandate. Associations of interest were analyzed using descriptive statistics., Key Results: Approximately half of the sample was of Hispanic or Latino origin (48 %); most respondents identified as White (59 %), followed by 12 % who identified as Asian. Overall, 59 % of participants supported the possibility for a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Preliminary data showed significant racial differences in willingness to support a possible COVID-19 vaccine mandate (χ 2 (1, n = 893) = 26.7, p < .001, phi = .17); 80 % of Asian people reported support for COVID-19 vaccination mandate compared to 50 % to 57 % for other racial groups. Significant differences also emerged by ethnicity (χ 2 (4, n = 1033) = 7.12, p = .008, phi = .08) whereby a higher percentage of Latino participants (66 %) reported willingness to support a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Similarly, significant differences were found by age (χ 2 (4, n = 1045) = 20.92, p < .001, phi = .21), yet no significant differences were found by sex or previous COVID-19 diagnosis., Conclusion: Support for a COVID-19 vaccination mandate is controversial even among vaccinated people. Identifying and understanding cultural and contextual factors that underlie differences in attitudes and beliefs about COVID-19 vaccination mandates is essential to advance dialogue and inform educational health campaigns to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Factors related with COVID-19 vaccine uptake in children and adolescents in Norway remain unclear, despite this being useful knowledge for future pandemic preparedness. This study aimed to comprehensively examine individual and familial factors associated with vaccine uptake in children and adolescents in Norway. We utilized nationwide registry-data from various health registries and Statistics Norway, encompassing all children and adolescents living in Norway during the pandemic, until 31-Dec-2022. Vaccine uptake is defined as receiving at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. We employed a forward stepwise logistic regression model and a random forest machine-learning algorithm to explore the relationship between vaccine uptake and socio-cultural, demographic, and health-related factors. We included 423,548 5-11-year-olds, 269,830 12-15-year-olds, and 120,854 16-17-year-olds. Vaccine uptake in these three groups was respectively 2.6 %, 73.3 %, and 87.3 %. Factors associated with vaccine uptake varied by age group. In youngest children, immigrant background (Odds-ratio (OR) = 1.58, 95 % confidence interval (CI) (1.14-2.19)), born extremely preterm (OR = 2.38, 95 % CI (1.60-3.54)), having risk of severe COVID-19 (OR = 5.40, 95 % CI (4.69-6.23) and maternal COVID-19 vaccination (OR = 6.34, 95 % CI (5.35-7.53)) were positively associated with vaccine uptake. The latter two factors were also strongly, positively associated with vaccine uptake in 12-15-year-olds, while previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was negatively associated (OR = 0.12, 95 % CI (0.11-0.14). Similar findings were observed in 16-17-year-olds. COVID-19 vaccine uptake differed markedly by age group, and major associated factors included socio-demographics and parental COVID-19 vaccination status, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, but also being born premature and having moderate or high risk of severe COVID-19., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: While safety of influenza vaccines is well-established, some studies have suggested potential associations between influenza vaccines and certain adverse events (AEs). This study examined the safety of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccines among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years., Methods: A self-controlled case series compared incidence rates of anaphylaxis, encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), and transverse myelitis following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations (i.e., any, high-dose or adjuvanted) in risk and control intervals among Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 65 years. We used conditional Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for event-dependent observation time and seasonality. Analyses also accounted for uncertainty from outcome misclassification where feasible. For AEs with any statistically significant associations, we stratified results by concomitant vaccination status., Results: Among 12.7 million vaccine recipients, we observed 76 anaphylaxis, 276 encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, 134 GBS and 75 transverse myelitis cases. Only rates of anaphylaxis were elevated in risk compared to control intervals. With all adjustments, an elevated, but non-statistically significant, anaphylaxis rate was observed following any (IRR: 2.40, 95% CI: 0.96-6.03), high-dose (IRR: 2.31, 95% CI: 0.67-7.91), and adjuvanted (IRR: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.71-15.08) influenza vaccination; anaphylaxis IRRs were 2.54 (95% CI: 0.49-13.05) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.38-7.05) for persons with and without concomitant vaccination, respectively., Conclusions: Rates of encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, GBS, or transverse myelitis were not elevated following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. There was an increased rate of anaphylaxis following influenza vaccination that may have been influenced by concomitant vaccination., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Widely documented psychological antecedents of vaccination are confidence in vaccines, complacency, convenience, calculation, collective responsibility (5C model) with the recent addition of confidence in the wider system and social conformism. While the capacity of these seven antecedents (7C) to explain variance in COVID-19 vaccine intentions has been previously documented, we study whether these factors also are associated with vaccine behaviours, beyond intentions., Methods: From February to June 2022, we recruited a sample of adults in France, including persons with notified recent SARS-CoV-2 infection, along with relatives and randomly selected non-infected persons. Participants completed self-administered questionnaires assessing COVID-19 vaccination history and the 7C antecedents. We defined vaccination behaviours as three outcomes: at-least-one-dose vaccine status by 2022 (N = 49,019), up-to-date vaccination status (N = 46,566), and uptake speed of first dose (N = 25,998). We conducted multivariable logistic regressions and Cox models., Results: Among the 49,019 participants, 95.0% reported receipt of at least one dose and 89.8% were up to date with recommendations. All 7C antecedents were significantly associated with the outcomes, although effects were weaker for up-to-date vaccination status and uptake speed. The strongest effects (most vs. least vaccine-favourable attitude level, at-least-one-dose vaccination status) were observed for collective responsibility (OR: 14.44; 95%CI: 10.72-19.45), calculation (OR: 10.29; 95%CI: 7.53-14.05), and confidence in the wider system (OR: 8.94; 95%CI: 6.51-12.27)., Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the 7C not only explain vaccine intention, but also vaccine behaviours, and underpins the importance of developing vaccine promotion strategies considering the 7C antecedents., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The cost effectiveness of childhood varicella vaccination is uncertain, as evidenced by variation in national health policies. Within the European Economic Area (EEA), only 10 of 30 countries offer universally funded childhood varicella vaccination. This study estimates the cost effectiveness of universal childhood varicella vaccination for one EEA country (Ireland), highlighting the difference in cost effectiveness between alternative vaccination strategies., Methods: An age-structured dynamic transmission model, simulating varicella zoster virus transmission, was developed to analyse the impact of three vaccination strategies; one-dose at 12 months old, two-dose at 12 and 15 months old (short-interval), and two-dose at 12 months and five years old (long-interval). The analysis adopted an 80-year time horizon and considered payer and societal perspectives. Clinical effectiveness was based on cases of varicella and subsequently herpes zoster and post-herpetic neuralgia avoided, and outcomes were expressed in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were presented in 2022 Irish Euro and cost effectiveness was interpreted with reference to a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per QALY gained., Results: From the payer perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for a one-dose strategy, compared with no vaccination, was estimated at €8,712 per QALY gained. The ICER for the next least expensive strategy, two-dose long-interval, compared with one-dose, was estimated at €45,090 per QALY gained. From a societal perspective, all three strategies were cost-saving compared with no vaccination; the two-dose short-interval strategy dominated, yielding the largest cost savings and health benefits. Results were stable across a range of sensitivity and scenario analyses., Conclusion: A one-dose strategy was highly cost effective from the payer perspective, driven by a reduction in hospitalisations. Two-dose strategies were cost saving from the societal perspective. These results should be considered alongside other factors such as acceptability of a new vaccine within the overall childhood immunisation schedule, programme objectives and budget impact., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Examining the spectrum of vaccine attitudes within the general public, spanning from hesitancy to confidence, is pivotal in addressing the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite widespread campaigns advocating for vaccine uptake, a proportion of the population harbour reservations about the safety and efficacy of vaccines. This study seeks to explore the determinants of vaccine attitudes in Canada, leveraging key concepts from the well-established Self-Determination Theory (SDT), including basic psychological needs and the quality of an individual's motivation. During a crucial juncture in the COVID-19 pandemic (December 2021), 292 participants were recruited and completed an online survey assessing levels of satisfaction/frustration of basic psychological needs (sense of autonomy, relatedness, and competence), vaccine attitudes (confidence and hesitancy), and motivation towards vaccination (controlled and autonomous). Two mediation models were employed to examine whether autonomous-controlled motivation mediated the relationship between need satisfaction-frustration and vaccine attitudes. Model 1 revealed a full mediating effect, indicating that need satisfaction influenced vaccine confidence only through autonomous motivation (ab 1  = 0.09, SE = 0.04, z = 2.19, 95 % CI [0.01, 0.18]). Meanwhile, Model 2 demonstrated that need frustration was associated with vaccine hesitancy partially through controlled motivation (ab 2  = 0.05, SE = 0.02, z = 2.54, 95 % CI [0.02, 0.10]). These findings underscore the applicability of SDT in investigating the motivational mechanisms that shape vaccine attitudes. Recognizing psychosocial factors, including the balance of basic needs and quality of motivations, may be integral to informing effective public health strategies., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The importance of vaccination in combating the COVID-19 pandemic is widely acknowledged. The aim of this study was (1) to understand how one's vaccine conspiracy beliefs would influence their public health news processing, (2) to examine how specific public health news features (i.e., news frame) would influence message processing, and (3) to examine if there were any differences between Black and White participants in their message processing., Methods: A nationwide online experiment (N = 821) with a 3 (vaccine conspiracy beliefs: high vs. moderate vs. low) × 2 (participants' race: Black vs. White) × 2 (news frames: gain vs. loss) mixed-factorial design was conducted in the United States., Results: Participants' level of vaccine conspiracy beliefs was predictive of their responses to outcome measures. Additionally, Black participants reported higher perceived message effectiveness, more favorable attitudes toward the message, and higher vaccination intentions than White participants. Furthermore, health news that emphasized vaccination benefits produced more favorable attitudes than those emphasizing losses associated with non-vaccination, especially for White participants. Lastly, participants reported more favorable attitudes toward gain-framed health news regardless of their vaccine conspiracy beliefs., Conclusion: It is crucial for health officials to work to find effective media message strategies to combat COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy theories and misinformation. Furthermore, this study supports the significance of health organizations' ongoing efforts to tailor public health messaging to specific racial groups, as evidenced by considerable variations in perceptions among Black and White Americans., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier India Pvt Ltd.)

Background: Vaccination against pneumococci is currently the most effective method of protection against pneumococcal infections. The aim of the study was to analyse changes in hospitalisations and in-hospital deaths due to pneumonia before (2009-2016) and after (2017-2020) the introduction of PCV 10 vaccinations in the National Immunisation Programme in Poland., Methods: Data on hospitalisations related to community acquired pneumonia (CAP) in the years 2009-2020 were obtained from the Nationwide General Hospital Morbidity Study. Analyses were made in the age groups: <2, 2-3, 4-5, 6-19, 20-59, 60+ years in 2009-2016 and 2017-2020., Results: Overall, there were 1,503,105 CAP-related hospitalisations in 2009-2020, 0.7% of which were caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae infections. Children <2 years of age were the most frequently hospitalised for CAP per 100,000 population, followed by patients aged 2-3, 4-5 and 60+ years. In the years 2009-2016, the percentage of CAP hospital admissions increased significantly, and after the year 2017, it decreased significantly in each of the age groups (p<0.001). In the years 2009-2016, a significant increase in hospitalisations for Streptococcus pneumoniae infections was observed in the age groups <2, 2-3 and 4-5 years (p<0.05). A significant reduction in hospitalisations was observed in the age groups <2, 20-59 and 60+ in 2017-2020 (p<0.05). In the years 2009-2020, there were 84,367 in-hospital deaths due to CAP, 423 (0.5%) of which due to Streptococcus pneumoniae, with patients mainly aged 60+., Conclusions: Implementation of the PCV vaccination programme has effectively decreased the incidence of CAP hospitalisations, including children <2 years of age. The group that is most at risk of death are persons aged 60+. The results of our study can be useful in evaluating the vaccine efficacy and benefits, and they can be an essential part of public health policy. Effective prevention strategies for CAP should be implemented in different age groups., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier India Pvt Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Vaccine champions are common in primary care, but little is known about which champions are effective., Methods: In 2022, we surveyed 2,144 US primary care professionals (PCPs) who reported working with vaccine champions. Respondents rated the champion with whom they worked most closely on their effectiveness at improving vaccination rates., Results: About half (49 %) of PCPs perceived their closest champion as highly effective. PCPs perceived advanced practice providers and nursing staff as highly effective somewhat more often than physicians (52 % and 58 % vs 43 %, p <.001). Other correlates of perceived effectiveness included being a formally appointed versus informal champion, working extremely versus less closely with PCPs, and using a high (4-5) versus low (0-1) number of implementation strategies to improve vaccination rates (all p <.001)., Conclusions: Results suggest vaccine champions may benefit from having formal roles and opportunities to work closely with colleagues to improve vaccination rates using multiple strategies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In October 2023, the Tel Aviv District was notified of ten cases of measles. The outbreak initiated in a preschool with high vaccination coverage with one dose of MMR vaccine. Serological testing was available for eight patients (six children and two adults). Among the six children vaccinated with one dose of MMR vaccine, primary vaccine failure was demonstrated. Among the adults, secondary vaccine failure was confirmed. The outbreak was successfully contained due to a combination of factors, notably its occurrence within a population characterized by high vaccination coverage in Tel Aviv, during a period of restricted public interactions due to the prevailing state of war in the country. Despite challenging wartime conditions, effective prophylactic measures were promptly executed, encompassing a 2-dose MMR vaccination schedule for close contacts and the broader community of children in the TA district, successfully curbing the outbreak and preventing widespread infections., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier India Pvt Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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]

Background: The Norwegian Childhood Immunization Program maintains a high national coverage of 95-97% in the most recent years. Whether there are subgroups with lower uptake is less studied. This study examines pertussis and measles vaccination coverage among six immigrant groups in Norway. These vaccines are normally administered as part of different combination vaccines and their coverage rate indicate the national vaccination coverage against a range of additional infections., Methods: Data from the Norwegian National Population Register were linked at individual level with vaccination data from the Norwegian Immunisation Registry. The final sample consisted of 53,052 children born during 2000-2018 in Norway to parents who were born in Iraq, Lithuania, Pakistan, Poland, Somalia, or Vietnam. Vaccination coverage was measured at 2-years of age. Multivariate linear regression was utilized to estimate the relationship between vaccinations status, year of birth, gender, mother's length of residency in Norway, and area of residence., Results: At two years of age, the majority of the children were vaccinated. Coverage among the groups varied at, above, and below the national average for the two vaccines. For most of the years examined, children born by parents from Lithuania, Poland, and Somalia had lower coverage for the measles vaccine (range 81-84% in 2020) than the national level (97% in 2020). Children born by parents from the Eastern-European countries also had lower coverage than the national level for the pertussis vaccine (range 87-89% in 2020)., Discussion: This study illustrates how subgroups with lower vaccination coverage may exists within a well-established vaccination program with high national coverages. Differences in coverage were found for both vaccines, but the differences were more pronounced for the measles vaccine. The high vaccination coverage in Norway provides indirect protection through herd immunity for unvaccinated individuals, however, the lower vaccination coverage in some immigrant groups is a concern., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier India Pvt Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Prior experience of an adverse event following immunisation is a known barrier to vaccination. Limited Australian data evaluating adverse event recurrence among children exists to inform clinical decisions. We aimed to assess adverse event following immunisation recurrence among children with prior adverse events and to evaluate if family history increased adverse event risk., Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted from March 3rd until August 18th, 2023. Children ≤ 16 years with prior adverse events following immunisation in themselves or family were recruited from specialist immunisation clinics at two quaternary paediatric hospitals. Adverse event outcomes were collected via surveys administered at presentation, three, and eight days post vaccination, and analysed by key characteristics and potential risk factors., Results: Forty three of forty nine (43/49, 87.8 %) children enrolled received further vaccines. Of those who completed the follow up surveys, 50.0 % (16/32) reported an adverse event. Recurrence of prior adverse events occurred for 23.3 % (10/43, 95 % CI: 11.8 % - 38.6 %) of the cohort. Two of twelve (2/12, 16.7 %) participants with prior serious adverse events who received further vaccines reported a serious adverse event recurrence. No post review serious adverse events were observed in children with prior non serious adverse events. Neurological conditions were a risk factor for prior (neurological condition 3/3 versus no neurological condition 2/40, p < 0.001) and post review (neurological condition 2/3 versus no neurological condition 0/28, p = 0.006) post vaccination seizures. Family history had no relationship to post review adverse events (family history 5/8 versus no family history 11/23, p = 0.685)., Conclusion: Revaccination is safe for the majority of children with a personal or family history of adverse event following immunisation., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: [Dr Rama Kandasamy reports a relationship with Sanofi that includes: consulting or advisory. Rama Kandasamy receives a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Emerging Leader Fellowship (GNT1174010). If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper]., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: Being up-to-date with all recommended vaccines is needed to protect children from vaccine preventable diseases. Understanding vaccination patterns is needed to develop messaging and strategies to increase vaccination uptake and confidence., Methods: Data from the 2011 to 2021 National Immunization Surveys was used to assess trends and disparities in vaccination patterns, zero vaccination status, and up-to-date status of U.S. children by 19-35 months., Results: From 2011 to 2021, adherence to the recommended schedule using the stringent definition increased from 35.7 % to 52.2 % (p < 0.01), adherence to the alternate schedule decreased from 28.2 % to 15.1 % (p < 0.01), and proportion of children who were not up-to-date decreased from 49.0 % to 33.3 % (p < 0.01). However, the proportion of children who had zero vaccinations did not change from 2011 (0.9 %) to 2021 (0.9 %; p = 0.08). In 2021, children 19-23 months were less likely to follow the recommended schedule than children 24-29 months (49.2 % compared to 56.4 %, p < 0.01). Adherence to the recommended schedule among children 19-23 months decreased in 2021 compared to 2020 overall and for some subpopulations (e.g. those with non-Hispanic (NH) Black parents (33.2 % compared to 44.9 %, p < 0.01). Furthermore, it was lowest among children of NH Black parents living at or below the federal poverty level (31.2 %) compared to their respective NH White counterparts (43.6 %, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: While there were overall increases in adherence to the recommended schedule from 2011 to 2021, a sustained catch-up program is needed to prevent missed vaccinations and achieve equitable vaccination coverage for all children., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Solutions have been proposed to accelerate the development and rollout of vaccines against a hypothetical disease with epidemic or pandemic potential called Disease X. This may involve resolving uncertainties regarding the disease and the new vaccine. However the value for public health of collecting this information will depend on the time needed to perform research, but also on the time needed to produce vaccine doses. We explore this interplay, and its effect on the decision on whether or not to perform research., Method: We simulate numerically the emergence and transmission of a disease in a population using a susceptible-infected-recovered (SIR) compartmental model with vaccination. Uncertainties regarding the disease and the vaccine are represented by parameter prior distributions. We vary the date at which vaccine doses are available, and the date at which information about parameters becomes available. We use the expected value of perfect information (EVPI) and the expected value of partially perfect information (EVPPI) to measure the value of information., Results: As expected, information has less or no value if it comes too late, or (equivalently) if it can only be used too late. However we also find non trivial dynamics for shorter durations of vaccine development. In this parameter area, it can be optimal to implement vaccination without waiting for information depending on the respective durations of dose production and of clinical research., Conclusion: We illustrate the value of information dynamics in a Disease X outbreak scenario, and present a general approach to properly take into account uncertainties and transmission dynamics when planning clinical research in this scenario. Our method is based on numerical simulation and allows us to highlight non trivial effects that cannot otherwise be investigated., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Introduction: Pakistan still has ongoing transmission of wild type polio virus. This study aims to determine changes in full vaccination with recommended Expanded Program on Immunization vaccines, including polio, by several socio-economic and demographic factors., Methods: We used three waves of Pakistan's Demographic and Health Survey, a population-based cross-sectional study from 2006-07 (N = 1471), 2012-13 (N = 1706), and 2017-18 (N = 1549), analyzed by residence, wealth, and sociodemographic factors. Analysis was limited to children aged 12-23 months in Punjab, Sindh, Northwest Frontier Province/Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. Full vaccination was measured as receipt of one Bacillus Calmette-Guérin dose, one measles dose, 3 polio doses, and 3 Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis doses. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) from logistic regression were used to determine associations between undervaccination and demographic variables., Results: Full vaccination coverage was 50.6 % in 2006-07, 54.7 % in 2012-13, and 68.3 % in 2017-18. In 2006-07, the odds of undervaccination were significantly higher in Sindh (OR: 1.74, 95 % CI: 1.30, 2.31) than Punjab, and disparities across province changed over time (P < 0.0001); notably, undervaccination was significantly higher in Sindh, KPK, and Balochistan than Punjab in 2017. Compared to the middle wealth quintile, the poorest had significantly higher odds of undervaccination in 2006-07 (OR: 2.58, 95 % CI: 1.76, 3.78), and this did not significantly change over time (P = 0.2168). The proportion of those with a polio birth dose increased across waves from 56.3 % in 2006-07 to 83.7 % in 2017-18; receiving three or more polio vaccine doses remained unchanged., Conclusion: This study showed that the proportion of fully vaccinated children in Pakistan increased across three waves. Full vaccination and administration of polio vaccine birth doses have increased recently in Pakistan. The association between undervaccination with province differed significantly across the waves, with vaccination disparities between provinces increasing. Those in the poorest wealth quintile had the greatest odds of undervaccination., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Borno state in north-eastern Nigeria is the epicentre of the >10 years' insurgency activities that have affected the region since 2009, resulting in the destruction of health facilities, killing of health workers, massive population displacement and lack of access to populations to provide health services. This article demonstrates how the involvement of community informants from insecure areas (CIIA) to conduct polio surveillance in security-challenged settlements of Borno state contributed to the expansion of polio surveillance reach beyond polio vaccination reach., Method: In each of the 19 security compromised Local Government areas (LGAs) with community informants from insecure areas, Android phones enabled with Vaccination Tracking System (VTS) technology and Open Data Kit (ODK) mobile application were provided to capture geo-coordinates as evidence (geo evidence) for polio surveillance activity conducted. These geo evidence captured were uploaded and mapped to show insecure settlements reached with polio surveillance and those yet to be reached., Results: A total of 3183 security compromised settlements were reached for polio surveillance between March 2018 and October 2019 with valid geo evidence, 542 of these security-compromised settlements had not been previously reached by any other intervention for polio surveillance or polio vaccination., Conclusion: The capturing of geo-coordinates as a proxy indicator of polio surveillance activity conducted by informants provided significant evidence of settlements reached for sustained polio surveillance even when a case of Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) had not been reported from these settlements. Using the geo evidence captured by CIIA in insecure settlements, we have demonstrated the expansion of polio surveillance reach beyond polio vaccination reach in Borno state., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The National Immunization Survey-Child (NIS-Child) provides annual vaccination coverage estimates in the United States for children aged 19 through 35 months, nationally, for each state, and for select local areas and territories. There is a need for vaccination coverage estimates for smaller geographic areas to support local authority planning and identify counties with potentially low vaccination coverage for possible further intervention. We describe small area estimation methods using 2008-2018 NIS-Child data to generate county-level estimates for children up to two years of age born 2007-2011 and 2012-2016. We applied an empirical best linear unbiased prediction method to combine direct estimates of vaccination coverage with model-based prediction using county-level predictors regarding health and demographic characteristics. We review the predictors commonly selected for the small area models and note multiple predictors related to barriers to vaccination., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Understanding vaccine hesitancy among parents is of emerging interest and of rising importance for promoting vaccine uptake to prevent pediatric illness. Here, we examine associations between pediatric vaccine refusal and parental symptoms of anxiety., Methods: Our cross-sectional survey assessed pediatric vaccine refusal in 1699 parents in a US national sample. Participants completed a sociodemographic questionnaire, the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, and symptoms of anxiety (GAD-7)., Results: The prevalence of pediatric vaccine refusal was 15.5 %. Parent symptoms of anxiety were related to vaccine refusal (OR = 1.07 [1.03, 1.10]). Mild (1.88 [1.39, 2.54], p <.001) and clinically significant (2.14 [1.39, 3.31], p <.001) symptoms of anxiety were also related to pediatric vaccine refusal. Parental anxiety was also associated with perceived risks of vaccines and reduced confidence., Conclusions: Findings highlight the need to consider parental anxiety in the development of public health interventions that address substandard pediatric vaccine uptake., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: School vaccine mandates (SVMs) are population health interventions that require monitoring and communicating about vaccination of school-aged children, with an aim of controlling infectious disease outbreaks. While 43 % of World Health Organization member states report having some sort of SVM, their details vary. A newer element of some SVMs is an "education component" requiring compulsory information, education, or counseling of parents/guardians who decline to vaccinate their children for non-medical reasons., Methods: This environmental scan sought, mapped, and synthesized evidence on the existence, format, and impacts of education components of SVMs in 18 affluent Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development comparator countries., Findings: We found current SVMs in nine of the 18 comparator countries, but education components to those SVMs only in Canada (n = 2) and the U.S. (n = 9), where such policies were made at the provincial/state level. The earliest was implemented in 2011 and most recent has not yet been implemented. Education components were used as requirements for obtaining non-medical exemptions from SVMs, and involved either an informational paper to be read and signed, a counseling or information session from a health professional (public health worker or licensed provider such as family doctor), or an online module to be completed. Peer-reviewed research on in-person sessions suggests association with at least short-term increased vaccine uptake and reduction of non-medical exemptions. Available data on online module education components suggests similar impacts, but research to date is limited., Conclusion: SVMs with educational components are uncommon but have been increasing since 2011. The details of these education components vary, although topics covered in online modules are relatively consistent. Evidence to date suggests at least short-term reduction in non-medical exemptions associated with implementation of SVM education components, but additional research is required to follow-up and confirm, especially as regards online education modules., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Devon Greyson reports financial support was provided by British Columbia Immunization Committee. Devon Greyson reports financial support was provided by Michael Smith Health Research BC., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Vaccine hesitancy is a primary factor that influences vaccine uptake; however, no specific measurement tool to accurately assess vaccine hesitancy is available in China. This study aimed to develop a general vaccine hesitancy scale for childhood immunization., Methods: We adopted a three-phase process with nine steps to develop and finalize our scale. The scale framework and initial item pool were determined by a literature review. Expert consultation and cognitive interviews with parents were conducted to evaluate content validity. Questionnaire surveys involving parents of children aged <6 years were conducted to select items. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were employed to identify and validate the scale factor structure. The scale's reliability and validity were assessed using multiple indicators., Results: Of the initial 38 items, 21 were retained after expert consultation and cognitive interviews. In survey 1, the number of scale items decreased to 16 following item analysis and EFA. In survey 2, four items were added and EFA identified four factors. In survey 3, CFA confirmed the four-factor structure and the reliability indicators were satisfactory for the total scale. The level of vaccine hesitancy assessed by our scale was positively associated with vaccination refusal behavior and the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale score. The final scale comprised four dimensions (confidence, complacency, convenience, and calculation) with 17 items., Conclusions: We developed a validated and reliable measurement to assess vaccine hesitancy among parents of children, which promises to be suitable for wide use in China., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

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]

Objective: To understand COVID-19 vaccine decision-making among Black women in the United States., Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews with 60 Black women (both African American and first- and second-generation immigrants originating from Africa and the Caribbean) living in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area., Results: Participants who were highly motivated to get vaccinated described their trust in science and a desire to protect themselves and those around them; while those who delayed vaccination reported doubts about vaccine safety. Many reported being influenced by targeted misinformation including the pervasive vaccine myths related to reproductive health. Historical trauma from unethical biomedical research and experiences of racism were also motivating factors. There were several concerns raised that were specific to ethnic groups., Conclusions: Current public health strategies that are intended to promote COVID vaccination are failing Black communities. Participants highlighted the need for clear and culturally appropriate communication about COVID-19 and the vaccines that is aligned with their communities' values and addresses misinformation. The critical insights we have gained by listening to these communities should be used to develop novel vaccination policy approaches., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Active surveillance systems for monitoring vaccine safety among pregnant women address some of the limitations of a current passive surveillance approach utilized in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). However, few active surveillance systems in LMIC exist. Our study assessed the feasibility of utilizing three existing data collection systems in Kenya for active surveillance of maternal immunization and to assess the applicability of Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in pregnancy (GAIA) case definitions that were initially developed for clinical trials within these systems., Methods: We assessed applicability of GAIA case definition for maternal Tetanus Toxoid exposure, stillbirth, low birth weight, small for gestational age, Neonatal Invasive Blood Stream Infection (NIBSI), prematurity and neonatal death in two routine web-based health information systems (Kenya EMR and DHIS-2), and a web-based population-based pregnancy research platform (ANCOV 1 ) in Kenya., Results: All three HIS were capable of reporting selected outcomes to varying degrees of GAIA certainty. The ANCOV platform was the most robust in collecting and collating clinical data for effective maternal pharmacovigilance. The utilization of facility- and district-aggregated data limits the usefulness of DHIS-2 in pharmacovigilance as currently operationalized. While the Kenya EMR contained individual level data and meets the key considerations for effective pharmacovigilance, it was used primarily for HIV care and treatment records in a small proportion of health facilities and would require additional resources to expand to all antenatal care facilities and to link maternal and infant records., Discussion: Population-based research studies may offer a responsive short-term option for implementing maternal vaccine pharmacovigilance in LMICs. However, the foundation exists for long-term capacity building within the national health electronic data systems to provide this critical service as well as ensure participation of the country in international studies on maternal vaccine safety., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)