Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) are independent advisory committees that develop evidence-based recommendations to guide national immunization programs and policies. Systematic reviews are recommended to be used in this process, since they synthesize findings from numerous studies and, when done well, provide reliable estimates about intervention effects. However, conducting systematic reviews requires significant resources (time, staff) that many NITAGs do not have. A large number of systematic reviews on vaccination-related topics already exist, and every year more are published. Increasing NITAGs’ access to and use of existing systematic reviews could facilitate their process for developing vaccine recommendations.
Objectives: The Robert Koch Institute – in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine – aims to increase NITAGs’ access to and use of existing systematic reviews by developing a user-friendly registry of systematic reviews on vaccination-related topics and an online course on how to use existing reviews in vaccine decision-making. Both the registry and course will be hosted by WHO’s NITAG resource center.
Methods: To inform the development of both products, we designed a survey for potential end users (i.e., NITAG members and secretariats, WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) members and secretariat) to assess their baseline needs and behaviors with regard to the use of existing systematic reviews. We also assessed the feasibility of appraising the quality of reviews in the registry, by applying the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) instrument to a sample of 20 reviews on vaccination-related topics. Lastly, we organized an international experts workshop on methods for using systematic reviews.
Results: Results from the end user survey will be reported at the Cochrane Colloquium. Our feasibility assessment suggested that AMSTAR 2 is easy to apply to reviews in the registry and that the time required for review decreases as users of the instrument gain more experience with it. We used insights from the experts workshop to develop a list of possible concepts for the registry and course (i.e., “Basic,” “Expanded,” and “Deluxe” versions of both products), a ranked list of ideas for how both products could be set up, and a script for the e-learning course.
Conclusions: Development of both the online registry and course are underway. We will conduct the survey and prepare an article summarizing results from the experts workshop in the second quarter of 2020 and pilot-test draft versions of the registry and course in the last quarter of 2020. Multiple types of formative research are being conducted to maximize the potential utility of the registry and course for NITAG members and secretariats.
Objectives: The Robert Koch Institute – in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine – aims to increase NITAGs’ access to and use of existing systematic reviews by developing a user-friendly registry of systematic reviews on vaccination-related topics and an online course on how to use existing reviews in vaccine decision-making. Both the registry and course will be hosted by WHO’s NITAG resource center.
Methods: To inform the development of both products, we designed a survey for potential end users (i.e., NITAG members and secretariats, WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) members and secretariat) to assess their baseline needs and behaviors with regard to the use of existing systematic reviews. We also assessed the feasibility of appraising the quality of reviews in the registry, by applying the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) instrument to a sample of 20 reviews on vaccination-related topics. Lastly, we organized an international experts workshop on methods for using systematic reviews.
Results: Results from the end user survey will be reported at the Cochrane Colloquium. Our feasibility assessment suggested that AMSTAR 2 is easy to apply to reviews in the registry and that the time required for review decreases as users of the instrument gain more experience with it. We used insights from the experts workshop to develop a list of possible concepts for the registry and course (i.e., “Basic,” “Expanded,” and “Deluxe” versions of both products), a ranked list of ideas for how both products could be set up, and a script for the e-learning course.
Conclusions: Development of both the online registry and course are underway. We will conduct the survey and prepare an article summarizing results from the experts workshop in the second quarter of 2020 and pilot-test draft versions of the registry and course in the last quarter of 2020. Multiple types of formative research are being conducted to maximize the potential utility of the registry and course for NITAG members and secretariats.