Literature DB >> 20434547

Can the Brighton Collaboration case definitions be used to improve the quality of Adverse Event Following Immunization (AEFI) reporting? Anaphylaxis as a case study.

Michael S Gold1, Jane Gidudu, Mich Erlewyn-Lajeunesse, Barbara Law.   

Abstract

The Brighton Collaboration (BC) was established in 2000 with the aim of developing globally accepted standardized case definitions for adverse events following immunizations (AEFI) as well as guidelines for the collection, analysis and presentation of surveillance data. Some of the BC case definitions are complex and this may limit their application for use in post-marketing vaccine surveillance. Barriers to the application of the BC case definitions include an incomplete description of an adverse event and inconsistencies in reporter use of adverse event terms. We have taken the BC case definition for anaphylaxis and developed a clinical checklist and glossary of terms used in the case definition. It is anticipated that these resources can be used at a community level by AEFI reporters. If used, these resources could improve the quality of adverse event reports which would facilitate the application of the BC case definition at a regional and/or national level. 2010. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20434547     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.04.041

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vaccine        ISSN: 0264-410X            Impact factor:   3.641


  7 in total

1.  Enhancing the work of the Department of Health and Human Services national vaccine program in global immunization: recommendations of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee: approved by the National Vaccine Advisory Committee on September 12, 2013.

Authors: 
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  Incidence of food anaphylaxis in Piemonte region (Italy): data from registry of Center for Severe Allergic Reactions.

Authors:  Giovanni Rolla; Sabrina Mietta; Alberto Raie; Claudia Bussolino; Franco Nebiolo; Maurizio Galimberti; Gianni Cadario; Enrico Heffler
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2013-07-13       Impact factor: 3.397

3.  International Consensus (ICON): allergic reactions to vaccines.

Authors:  Stephen C Dreskin; Neal A Halsey; John M Kelso; Robert A Wood; Donna S Hummell; Kathryn M Edwards; Jean-Christoph Caubet; Renata J M Engler; Michael S Gold; Claude Ponvert; Pascal Demoly; Mario Sanchez-Borges; Antonella Muraro; James T Li; Menachem Rottem; Lanny J Rosenwasser
Journal:  World Allergy Organ J       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 4.084

4.  Developing standard safety outcomes for COVID-19 vaccines.

Authors:  Jim P Buttery
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 3.641

5.  Utility and futility of skin testing to address concerns surrounding messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine reactions.

Authors:  Mitchell M Pitlick; Andrea N Sitek; Michael E D'Netto; Kelley N Dages; Sergio E Chiarella; Alexei Gonzalez-Estrada; Avni Y Joshi; Miguel A Park
Journal:  Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 6.347

6.  The logic of surveillance guidelines: an analysis of vaccine adverse event reports from an ontological perspective.

Authors:  Mélanie Courtot; Ryan R Brinkman; Alan Ruttenberg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Vaccine-related Anaphylaxis Cases Confirmed by KCDC from 2001-2016.

Authors:  Eui Jeong Roh; Mi Hee Lee; Kun Baek Song; Yeon Kyeong Lee; Min Kyung Kim; Tae Eun Kim; Eun Hee Chung
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 2.153

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.