Chiara de Waure, Elisabetta Alti, Vincenzo Baldo, Paolo Bonanni, Michele Conversano, Alberto Fedele, Giovanni Gabutti, Roberto Ieraci, Francesco Landi, Raffaele Landolfi, Andrea Orsi, Caterina Rizzo, Alessandro Rossi, Alberto Villani, Francesco Vitale, Alexander Domnich
{"title":"季节性流感疫苗效力和有效性评估结果的绘图和排序:德尔菲研究。","authors":"Chiara de Waure, Elisabetta Alti, Vincenzo Baldo, Paolo Bonanni, Michele Conversano, Alberto Fedele, Giovanni Gabutti, Roberto Ieraci, Francesco Landi, Raffaele Landolfi, Andrea Orsi, Caterina Rizzo, Alessandro Rossi, Alberto Villani, Francesco Vitale, Alexander Domnich","doi":"10.1080/14760584.2024.2367457","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Protection provided by seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) may be measured against numerous outcomes, and their heterogeneity may hamper decision-making. The aim of this study was to explore outcomes used for estimation of SIV efficacy/effectiveness (VE) and obtain expert consensus on their importance.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>An umbrella review was first conducted to collect and map outcomes considered in systematic reviews of SIV VE. A Delphi study was then performed to reach expert convergence on the importance of single outcomes, measured on a 9-point Likert scale, in principal target groups, namely children, working-age adults, older adults, subjects with co-morbidities and pregnant women.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature review identified 489 outcomes. Following data reduction, 20 outcomes were selected for the Delphi process. After two Delphi rounds and a final consensus meeting, convergence was reached. All 20 outcomes were judged to be important or critically important. More severe outcomes, such as influenza-related hospital encounters and mortality with or without laboratory confirmation, were generally top-ranked across all target groups (median scores ≥8 out of 9).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Rather than focusing on laboratory-confirmed infection per se, experimental and observational VE studies should include more severe influenza-related outcomes because they are expected to exercise a greater impact on decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":12326,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Vaccines","volume":" ","pages":"636-644"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mapping and ranking outcomes for the evaluation of seasonal influenza vaccine efficacy and effectiveness: a delphi study.\",\"authors\":\"Chiara de Waure, Elisabetta Alti, Vincenzo Baldo, Paolo Bonanni, Michele Conversano, Alberto Fedele, Giovanni Gabutti, Roberto Ieraci, Francesco Landi, Raffaele Landolfi, Andrea Orsi, Caterina Rizzo, Alessandro Rossi, Alberto Villani, Francesco Vitale, Alexander Domnich\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14760584.2024.2367457\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Protection provided by seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) may be measured against numerous outcomes, and their heterogeneity may hamper decision-making. The aim of this study was to explore outcomes used for estimation of SIV efficacy/effectiveness (VE) and obtain expert consensus on their importance.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>An umbrella review was first conducted to collect and map outcomes considered in systematic reviews of SIV VE. A Delphi study was then performed to reach expert convergence on the importance of single outcomes, measured on a 9-point Likert scale, in principal target groups, namely children, working-age adults, older adults, subjects with co-morbidities and pregnant women.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature review identified 489 outcomes. Following data reduction, 20 outcomes were selected for the Delphi process. After two Delphi rounds and a final consensus meeting, convergence was reached. All 20 outcomes were judged to be important or critically important. More severe outcomes, such as influenza-related hospital encounters and mortality with or without laboratory confirmation, were generally top-ranked across all target groups (median scores ≥8 out of 9).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Rather than focusing on laboratory-confirmed infection per se, experimental and observational VE studies should include more severe influenza-related outcomes because they are expected to exercise a greater impact on decision-making.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Vaccines\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"636-644\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Vaccines\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2024.2367457\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Vaccines","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2024.2367457","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:季节性流感疫苗接种(SIV)所提供的保护可通过多种结果来衡量,而这些结果的异质性可能会妨碍决策。本研究旨在探讨用于估算 SIV 效力/有效性 (VE) 的结果,并就其重要性达成专家共识:研究设计与方法:首先进行了总综述,以收集和绘制 SIV VE 系统综述中考虑的结果。然后进行德尔菲研究,以就主要目标群体(即儿童、工作年龄的成年人、老年人、合并疾病者和孕妇)的单一结果的重要性达成专家共识:结果:文献综述确定了 489 项结果。在对数据进行筛选后,选出了 20 项成果用于德尔菲进程。经过两轮德尔菲讨论和最后的共识会议,达成了一致意见。所有 20 项结果均被判定为重要或极其重要。在所有目标群体中,较严重的结果,如与流感相关的住院人次和实验室确诊或未经实验室确诊的死亡率,通常排名第一(中位数得分≥ 8 分(满分 9 分)):结论:实验性和观察性 VE 研究不应只关注实验室确诊的感染本身,还应包括更严重的流感相关结果,因为这些结果预计会对决策产生更大的影响。
Mapping and ranking outcomes for the evaluation of seasonal influenza vaccine efficacy and effectiveness: a delphi study.
Background: Protection provided by seasonal influenza vaccination (SIV) may be measured against numerous outcomes, and their heterogeneity may hamper decision-making. The aim of this study was to explore outcomes used for estimation of SIV efficacy/effectiveness (VE) and obtain expert consensus on their importance.
Research design and methods: An umbrella review was first conducted to collect and map outcomes considered in systematic reviews of SIV VE. A Delphi study was then performed to reach expert convergence on the importance of single outcomes, measured on a 9-point Likert scale, in principal target groups, namely children, working-age adults, older adults, subjects with co-morbidities and pregnant women.
Results: The literature review identified 489 outcomes. Following data reduction, 20 outcomes were selected for the Delphi process. After two Delphi rounds and a final consensus meeting, convergence was reached. All 20 outcomes were judged to be important or critically important. More severe outcomes, such as influenza-related hospital encounters and mortality with or without laboratory confirmation, were generally top-ranked across all target groups (median scores ≥8 out of 9).
Conclusions: Rather than focusing on laboratory-confirmed infection per se, experimental and observational VE studies should include more severe influenza-related outcomes because they are expected to exercise a greater impact on decision-making.
期刊介绍:
Expert Review of Vaccines (ISSN 1476-0584) provides expert commentary on the development, application, and clinical effectiveness of new vaccines. Coverage includes vaccine technology, vaccine adjuvants, prophylactic vaccines, therapeutic vaccines, AIDS vaccines and vaccines for defence against bioterrorism. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review.
The vaccine field has been transformed by recent technological advances, but there remain many challenges in the delivery of cost-effective, safe vaccines. Expert Review of Vaccines facilitates decision making to drive forward this exciting field.