Background: Vaccination coverages need to be constantly maintained and improved with the implementation of vaccination strategies. This paper describes the development of an evidence-based tool to guide their planning and evaluation. Methods: A scoping review was performed in MEDLINE and institutional websites to search for similar available tools. A first version of the tool was developed considering review results and a four-step method used for the control and continuous improvement of processes and products, namely the Deming cycle. A panel of eight experts was then involved in a Delphi study for the finalization of the tool that was eventually discussed in a face-to-face meeting. Results: The scoping review found only one document and the first version of the tool was composed of 30 items. After the Delphi first round, 11 additional items were suggested and 5 original items amended. After the Delphi second round 41 items were eventually included. During the face-to-face meeting, 7 items were recognized as requisites for setting vaccination strategies, whereas 17 as relevant ones. Conclusions: Current public health challenges impose the need for evidence-based tools to organize effective vaccination strategies. Our tool is a first proposal which aims to reflect this focus.

Calabro, G. E., Carini, E., Tognetto, A., Mancinelli, S., Sarnari, L., Colamesta, V., Ricciardi, W., De Waure, C., Developing an Evidence-Based Tool for Planning and Evaluating Vaccination Strategies Aimed at Improving Coverage in Elderly and At-Risk Adult Population, <<FRONTIERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH>>, 2021; 2021 (9): 658979-658985. [doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.658979] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/201209]

Developing an Evidence-Based Tool for Planning and Evaluating Vaccination Strategies Aimed at Improving Coverage in Elderly and At-Risk Adult Population

Calabro G. E.;Carini E.;Colamesta V.;Ricciardi W.;de Waure C.
2021

Abstract

Background: Vaccination coverages need to be constantly maintained and improved with the implementation of vaccination strategies. This paper describes the development of an evidence-based tool to guide their planning and evaluation. Methods: A scoping review was performed in MEDLINE and institutional websites to search for similar available tools. A first version of the tool was developed considering review results and a four-step method used for the control and continuous improvement of processes and products, namely the Deming cycle. A panel of eight experts was then involved in a Delphi study for the finalization of the tool that was eventually discussed in a face-to-face meeting. Results: The scoping review found only one document and the first version of the tool was composed of 30 items. After the Delphi first round, 11 additional items were suggested and 5 original items amended. After the Delphi second round 41 items were eventually included. During the face-to-face meeting, 7 items were recognized as requisites for setting vaccination strategies, whereas 17 as relevant ones. Conclusions: Current public health challenges impose the need for evidence-based tools to organize effective vaccination strategies. Our tool is a first proposal which aims to reflect this focus.
eng
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8264188/pdf/fpubh-09-658979.pdf
Calabro, G. E., Carini, E., Tognetto, A., Mancinelli, S., Sarnari, L., Colamesta, V., Ricciardi, W., De Waure, C., Developing an Evidence-Based Tool for Planning and Evaluating Vaccination Strategies Aimed at Improving Coverage in Elderly and At-Risk Adult Population, <>, 2021; 2021 (9): 658979-658985. [doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.658979] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/201209]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Calabrò Ge,2021.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia file ?: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 187.26 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
187.26 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/10807/201209
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact