Skip to main content

Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) advises the Secretary of State for Health and Welsh Ministers on vaccination and immunisation policies. As an academic primary care physician, I am a strong supporter of evidence-based immunisation schemes and also believe - as far as is practical - in open policy-making in which evidence that government bodies use to make their decisions is made public. In a letter published in the British Medical Journal , I commented on the use by the JCVI of unpublished data and refusal of the JCVI to make public all the evidence it uses.

The Chair of the  JCVI, Andy Hall, states that the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) does not make public all the evidence it uses for its decisions because this would lead to scientists refusing to send their work to the committee before it was published in a peer reviewed journal. However, he does not supply any evidence supply evidence that academics would refuse to supply unpublished data. With the impact of research being a key component of the Research Excellence Framework that will judge universities on their research, it is likely that academics would be very keen to have their work used by policy-making bodies. Andy Hall also did not give any examples of where the use of unpublished evidence has resulted in decisions that have led to improved health outcomes or reduced mortality.

Andy Hall also states that the processes the committee uses are “at least as robust as those of scientific journals.” However, the peer review processes used by medical journals are flawed, errors in articles are common, and many factual errors and methodological problems are not detected until after publication. Andy Hall did not expand on how the JCVI aims to deal with these problems in the unpublished evidence it receives.

I believe that the JCVI should have substantially more rigorous procedures for peer review than scientific journals because its decisions have major implications for public health, health outcomes, and healthcare spending. Furthermore, decisions on immunisation policy are partly subjective. For example, chickenpox vaccination is part of the childhood immunisation schedule in the USA but not in the UK. Hence, immunisation committees in different countries can look at the same evidence but reach different conclusions. Public policy making is not an exact science but should as far as possible be based on robust publicly available evidence that can be fully assessed by external stakeholders.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Improving discharge planning in NHS hospitals

Factors that need to be considered in discharge planning that have been identified in previous projects include:

Ensuring that discharge arrangements are discussed with patients, family members and carers; and that they are given a copy of the discharge summary.Adequate coordination between the hospital, community health services, general practices, and the providers of social care services.There is a follow-up after discharge of patients at high risk of complications or readmission - either in person or by telephone - to ensure that the discharge arrangements are working well. Medicines reconciliation is carried out. This is the process of verifying patient medication lists at a point-of-care transition, such as hospital discharge, to identify which medications have been added, discontinued, or changed from pre-admission medication lists.Ensuring that any outstanding test results at discharge are obtained and passed on to primary care teams; and ensuring there are clear arrangements …

Can GPs issue private prescriptions to NHS patients?

The NHS prescription charge in England is currently £8.40 per item. At this level, many commonly prescribed drugs will cost less than the prescription charge and so some NHS patients may occasionally ask if they can have a private prescription rather than an NHS prescription.

In the past, some GPs have been advised that they could issue both an NHS FP10 and a private prescription, and let the patient decide which to use. But the British Medical Association's General Practice Committee has obtained legal advice that said under the current primary care contract, GPs in England may not issue a private prescription alongside or as an alternative to an NHS FP10 prescription. In any consultation where a GP needs to issue an FP10, the concurrent issue of a private prescription would be a breach of NHS regulations.

The issuing of a private prescription in such circumstances could also be seen as an attempt to deprive the NHS of the funds it would receive from the prescription charge. Fur…

What impact will Brexit have on the UK's life sciences sector?

On Thursday 3 November 2016, I spoke at a seminar at the Imperial College Business School on the topic of the impact of Brexit on the UK's life sciences sector (the NHS, universities, and pharmaceutical and biomedical companies). I emphasised the important role played in the life sciences sector by EU-trained professionals and the need to ensure that the UK continued to attract highly-qualified professionals to work, for example, in our National Health Service. I also discussed the need to increase spending on research and development to ensure that the UK remained a world leader in the biomedical industry. The other speakers at the seminar were Andrew Lansley (former Secretary of State for Health) and Richard Phillips (Director of Healthcare Policy at the Association of British Healthcare industries). The event was chaired by Andrew Brown. A copy of my talk can be viewed on Slideshare.