ABSTRACT
Background
The breadth of protection of National Immunisation Programmes (NIPs) across Europe varies, however, this has not been assessed within published literature. Therefore, a framework was developed to assess the comprehensiveness of pediatric NIPs in Europe. This study aimed to validate and further develop criteria used to cluster countries into three tiers.
Research design and methods
Independent Europe-based experts (n = 23) in the field of pediatric vaccination were invited to participate in a double-blinded modified Delphi panel, with two online survey rounds and a virtual consensus meeting. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% of experts rating their agreement/disagreement on a 9-point Likert scale.
Results
The number of preventable diseases covered by an NIP, simplification of the vaccination calendar, strengthened protection by increasing serotype, degree of funding and epidemiological factors were considered key concepts for consideration of the comprehensiveness of pediatric NIPs in Europe. Experts highlighted that the framework should be extended to include adolescent vaccines and populations up to 18 years of age. Consensus regarding further amendments to the framework was also reached.
Conclusions
This Delphi panel validated a framework to assess the comprehensiveness of European NIPs. The framework can be used to facilitate discussions to help countries improve and expand the breadth of protection provided by their NIP.
Declaration of interest
U Sabale is an employee of MSD Lithuania and owns stock in Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, U.S.A., V Laigle is an employee of MSD France and owns stock in Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, U.S.A., J Murtagh is an employee of MSD Ireland and owns stock in Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, U.S.A.. Research execution was delivered by J Cochrane, D Riley, R Perry and L Heron who were employed by AV PROVE at the time this research was commissioned by MSD. P Bonanni, J Antonio Navarro Alonso and J Eskola were reimbursed for serving as steering committee members. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or material discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.
Reviewer disclosures
Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.
Author contributions
Study design and conceptualization: Ugne Sabale, Valerie Laigle, Janice Murtagh, Paolo Bonanni, Jose Antonio Navarro Alonso, Juhani Eskola, Louise Heron, Richard Perry, Danielle Riley, James Cochrane; b. Acquisition of data: Ugne Sabale, Valerie Laigle, Janice Murtagh, Louise Heron, Richard Perry, Danielle Riley, James Cochrane; c. Analysis and interpretation of data: Ugne Sabale, Valerie Laigle, Janice Murtagh, Louise Heron, Richard Perry, Danielle Riley, James Cochrane. Drafting the manuscript: Ugne Sabale, Valerie Laigle, Janice Murtagh, Louise Heron, Richard Perry, Danielle Riley, James Cochrane; b. Revising for intellectual content: Ugne Sabale, Valerie Laigle, Janice Murtagh, Paolo Bonanni, Jose Antonio Navarro Alonso, Juhani Eskola, Louise Heron, Richard Perry, Danielle Riley, James Cochrane. Final approval of the completed manuscript: Ugne Sabale, Valerie Laigle, Janice Murtagh, Paolo Bonanni, Jose Antonio Navarro Alonso, Juhani Eskola, Louise Heron, Richard Perry, Danielle Riley, James Cochrane.
Data availability statement
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the researchers at Adept Field Solutions, with special thanks to Jessica McGuinness as the project manager, who facilitated the fieldwork for the study.
Supplementary material
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2024.2324939