Reducing differences in the uptake of immunisations
This is an extract from the guidance. The complete guidance is available at guidance.nice.org.uk/ph21
5 Recommendations for research
PHIAC recommends that the following research questions should be addressed. It notes that 'effectiveness' in this context relates not only to the size of the effect, but also to cost effectiveness and duration of effect. It also takes into account any harmful or negative side effects.
What are the most effective and cost effective ways of increasing immunisation uptake among looked after children and young people and other population groups at risk of being only partially immunised or not immunised at all?
What are the most effective and cost effective ways of modifying services to increase vaccine uptake among children and young people, particularly those at risk of not being immunised, or of being only partially immunised? Does this vary by population subgroups? Examples might include home visits, changes in information provision and the introduction of opportunities to discuss immunisation before vaccines are given.
What are the most effective and cost effective ways of providing parents of children and young people with information to encourage timely immunisation? Specifically, what are the most effective and cost effective ways of providing information to reach those who are particularly at risk of not being immunised or only partially immunised?
How effective – and how acceptable to the public – are quasi-mandatory and incentive schemes for immunisation? (Examples of the former are schemes linked to nursery or school entry.) What impact do such schemes have on the timely uptake of vaccinations?
Does giving incentives to immunisation providers increase immunisation rates in the UK? For example, how does community target setting, or changes in targets or payment systems, affect immunisation coverage?
More detail on the gaps in the evidence identified during development of this guidance is provided in appendix D.