Improving the quality and use of immunization and surveillance data: Summary report of the Working Group of the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Concerns about the quality and use of immunization and vaccine-preventable disease (VPD) surveillance data have been highlighted on the global agenda for over two decades. In August 2017, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) established a Working Group (WG) onthe Quality and Use of Global Immunization and Surveillance Data to review the current status and evidence to make recommendations, which were presented to SAGE in October 2019. The WG synthesized evidence from landscape analyses, literature reviews, country case-studies, a data triangulation analysis, as well as surveys of experts. Data quality (DQ) was defined as data that are accurate, precise, relevant, complete, and timely enough for the intended purpose (fit-for-purpose), and data use as the degree to which data are actually used for defined purposes, e.g., immunization programme management, performance monitoring, decision-making. The WG outlined roles and responsibilities for immunization and surveillance DQ and use by programme level. The WG found that while DQ is dependent on quality data collection at health facilities, many interventions have targeted national and subnational levels, or have focused on new technologies, rather than the people and enabling environments required for functional information systems. The WG concluded that sustainable improvements in immunization and surveillance DQ and use will require efforts across the health system - governance, people, tools, and processes, including use of data for continuous quality improvement (CQI) - and that the approaches need to be context-specific, country-owned and driven from the frontline up. At the country level, major efforts are needed to: (1) embed monitoring DQ and use alongside monitoring of immunization and surveillance performance, (2) increase workforce capacity and capability for DQ and use, starting at the facility level, (3) improve the accuracy of immunization programme targets (denominators), (4) enhance use of existing data for tailored programme action (e.g., immunization programme planning, management and policy-change), (5) adopt a data-driven CQI approach as part of health system strengthening, (6) strengthen governance around piloting and implementation of new information and communication technology tools, and (7) improve data sharing and knowledge management across areas and organizations for improved transparency and efficiency. Global and regional partners are requested to support countries in adopting relevant recommendations for their setting and to continue strengthening the reporting and monitoring of immunization and VPD surveillance data through processes periodic needs assessment and revision processes. This summary of the WG's findings and recommendations can support "data-guided" implementation of the new Immunization Agenda 2030.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle