Article Text

Download PDFPDF

SMART Vaccines 2.0 decision-support platform: a tool to facilitate and promote priority setting for sustainable vaccination in resource-limited settings
  1. Benjamin J J McCormick1,
  2. Peter Waiswa2,3,
  3. Celia Nalwadda4,
  4. Nelson K Sewankambo4,5,
  5. Stacey L Knobler1,6
  1. 1Division of International Epidemiology and Population Studies, Fogarty International Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
  2. 2School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
  3. 3International Health, Dept of Public Health Sciences (IHCAR), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
  4. 4Uganda National Academy of Sciences, Kampala, Uganda
  5. 5School of Medicine, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda
  6. 6Sabin Vaccine Institute, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
  1. Correspondence to Ms Stacey L Knobler; stacey.knobler{at}sabin.org

Abstract

In resource-constrained environments, priority setting is critical to making sustainable decisions for introducing new and underused vaccines and choosing among vaccine products. Donor organisations and national governments in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) recognise the need to support prioritisation of vaccine decisions driven by local health system capacity, epidemiology and financial sustainability.

Successful efforts have supported the establishment of National Immunisation Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) to undertake evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) in LMICs. Now, attention is increasingly focused on supporting their function to leverage local expertise and priorities. EIDM and priority-setting functions are complex and dynamic processes. Here, we report a pilot of a web-based decision-support tool. Applying tenets of multicriteria decision analysis, SMART Vaccines 2.0 supported transparent, reproducible and evidence-informed priority setting with an easy-to-use interface and shareable outputs.

The pilot was run by the Uganda NITAG who were requested by the Ministry of Health (MOH) in 2016 to produce recommendations on the prioritised introduction of five new vaccines. The tool was acceptable to the NITAG and supported their recommendations to the MOH. The tool highlighted sensitivity in the prioritisation process to the inherent biases of different stakeholders. This feature also enabled examination of the implications of data uncertainty. Feedback from users identified areas where the tool could more explicitly support evidence-to-recommendation frameworks, ultimately informing the next generation of the platform, PriorityVax.

Country ownership and priority setting in vaccine decisions are central to sustainability. PriorityVax promotes auditable and rigorous deliberations; enables and captures the decision matrix of users; and generates shareable documentation of the process.

  • vaccines
  • health policy
  • immunisation
  • public health
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Handling editor Seye Abimbola

  • Contributors BJJM and SLK drafted the manuscript following piloting of SMART Vaccines 2.0 collaboratively with the Uganda NITAG, which included PW, CN and NKS who also gave invaluable assessments reflected in manuscript development. All authors read, edited and approved the manuscript.

  • Funding This work was supported by the Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, USA.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data availability statement There are no data in this work.