Literature DB >> 28285984

The ADVANCE Code of Conduct for collaborative vaccine studies.

Xavier Kurz1, Vincent Bauchau2, Patrick Mahy3, Steffen Glismann4, Lieke Maria van der Aa3, François Simondon5.   

Abstract

Lessons learnt from the 2009 (H1N1) flu pandemic highlighted factors limiting the capacity to collect European data on vaccine exposure, safety and effectiveness, including lack of rapid access to available data sources or expertise, difficulties to establish efficient interactions between multiple parties, lack of confidence between private and public sectors, concerns about possible or actual conflicts of interest (or perceptions thereof) and inadequate funding mechanisms. The Innovative Medicines Initiative's Accelerated Development of VAccine benefit-risk Collaboration in Europe (ADVANCE) consortium was established to create an efficient and sustainable infrastructure for rapid and integrated monitoring of post-approval benefit-risk of vaccines, including a code of conduct and governance principles for collaborative studies. The development of the code of conduct was guided by three core and common values (best science, strengthening public health, transparency) and a review of existing guidance and relevant published articles. The ADVANCE Code of Conduct includes 45 recommendations in 10 topics (Scientific integrity, Scientific independence, Transparency, Conflicts of interest, Study protocol, Study report, Publication, Subject privacy, Sharing of study data, Research contract). Each topic includes a definition, a set of recommendations and a list of additional reading. The concept of the study team is introduced as a key component of the ADVANCE Code of Conduct with a core set of roles and responsibilities. It is hoped that adoption of the ADVANCE Code of Conduct by all partners involved in a study will facilitate and speed-up its initiation, design, conduct and reporting. Adoption of the ADVANCE Code of Conduct should be stated in the study protocol, study report and publications and journal editors are encouraged to use it as an indication that good principles of public health, science and transparency were followed throughout the study.
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Code of conduct; Public health; Scientific integrity; Study team; Transparency

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28285984     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.02.039

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


  4 in total

1.  Impact of the Innovative Medicines Initiative on vaccine development.

Authors:  Philippe Denoel; Patricia Londoño-Hayes; Magda Chlebus; Magdalena Rodriguez de Azero
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 84.694

2.  Strengthening standards, transparency, and collaboration to support medicine evaluation: Ten years of the European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCePP).

Authors:  Xavier Kurz; Susana Perez-Gutthann
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 2.890

3.  Addressing challenges for clinical research responses to emerging epidemics and pandemics: a scoping review.

Authors:  Louise Sigfrid; Katherine Maskell; Peter G Bannister; Sharif A Ismail; Shelui Collinson; Sadie Regmi; Claire Blackmore; Eli Harriss; Kajsa-Stina Longuere; Nina Gobat; Peter Horby; Mike Clarke; Gail Carson
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 8.775

Review 4.  The ENCePP Code of Conduct: A best practise for scientific independence and transparency in noninterventional postauthorisation studies.

Authors:  Rosa Gini; Xavier Fournie; Helen Dolk; Xavier Kurz; Patrice Verpillat; François Simondon; Valerie Strassmann; Kathi Apostolidis; Thomas Goedecke
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 2.890

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.