4.0 Article

New immunization strategies: adapting to global challenges

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00103-019-03066-x

关键词

Vaccines; Global strategies; Expanded Programme on Immunization; Health Systems; Integration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immunization has made an enormous contribution to global health. Global vaccination coverage has dramatically improved and mortality rates among children due to vaccine-preventable diseases have been significantly reduced since the creation of the Expanded Programme of Immunization in 1974, the formation of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, in 2000, and the development of the Global Vaccine Action Plan in 2012. However, challenges remain and persisting inequities in vaccine uptake contribute to the continued occurrence and outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. Inequalities in immunization coverage by geography, urban-rural, and socio-economic status jeopardize the achievement of global immunization goals and call for renewed immunization strategies. These should take into account emerging opportunities for building better immunization systems and services, as well as the development of new vaccine products and delivery technologies. Such strategies need to achieve equity in vaccination coverage across and within countries. This will require the participation of communities, a better understanding of vaccine acceptance and hesitancy, the expansion of vaccination across the life course, approaches to improve immunization in middle-income countries, enhanced use of data and possible financial and non-financial incentives. Vaccines also have an important role to play in comprehensive disease control, including the fight against antimicrobial resistance. Lessons learned from disease eradication and elimination efforts of polio, measles and maternal and neonatal tetanus are instrumental in further enhancing global immunization strategies in line with the revised goals and targets of the new Immunization Agenda 2030, which is currently being developed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据