Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
How can the international community save more children's lives faster and more effectively in the 21 st century? This Working Paper analyzes the extent to which "frontloading" and predictable vaccine funding, as proposed by the International Finance Facility for Immunization (IFFIm), is more effective in impacting vaccine coverage than spending vaccine funds equally throughout the lives of projects. The IFFIm is an initiative of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), and supported by the governments of the United Kingdom, France, Sweden, Italy, Spain and Norway. An initial IFFIm investment of $4 billion is expected to prevent 5 million child deaths by 2015, and more than 5 million future adult deaths. Using a stylized model, the authors quantify the positive and negative effects of predictable vaccine funds and frontloading, and finds IFFIm's approach can increase the impact of vaccine coverage by 22%. This is because stable and long-term financing allows vaccine manufacturers and countries to plan for long periods of time, knowing that resources will be available. Front-loading helps to reduce the spread of disease and to immunize large groups of people faster.The Center for Global Development is an independent think tank that works to reduce global poverty and inequality through rigorous research and active engagement with the policy community. This Working Paper was made possible in part by funding from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.Use and dissemination of this Working Paper is encouraged, however reproduced copies may not be used for commercial purposes. Further usage is permitted under the terms of the Creative Commons License. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and should not be attributed to the directors or funders of the Center for Global Development.
How can the international community save more children's lives faster and more effectively in the 21 st century? This Working Paper analyzes the extent to which "frontloading" and predictable vaccine funding, as proposed by the International Finance Facility for Immunization (IFFIm), is more effective in impacting vaccine coverage than spending vaccine funds equally throughout the lives of projects. The IFFIm is an initiative of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), and supported by the governments of the United Kingdom, France, Sweden, Italy, Spain and Norway. An initial IFFIm investment of $4 billion is expected to prevent 5 million child deaths by 2015, and more than 5 million future adult deaths. Using a stylized model, the authors quantify the positive and negative effects of predictable vaccine funds and frontloading, and finds IFFIm's approach can increase the impact of vaccine coverage by 22%. This is because stable and long-term financing allows vaccine manufacturers and countries to plan for long periods of time, knowing that resources will be available. Front-loading helps to reduce the spread of disease and to immunize large groups of people faster.The Center for Global Development is an independent think tank that works to reduce global poverty and inequality through rigorous research and active engagement with the policy community. This Working Paper was made possible in part by funding from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.Use and dissemination of this Working Paper is encouraged, however reproduced copies may not be used for commercial purposes. Further usage is permitted under the terms of the Creative Commons License. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and should not be attributed to the directors or funders of the Center for Global Development.
BACKGROUND Vector surveillance is often used to predict tickborne diseases in endemic regions. Active and passive vector surveillance systems offer differing benefits and limitations, understanding how the outputs of these systems differ and how they correlate to human disease is essential to public health decision making. Active and passive vector surveillance systems in place in Minnesota between 2018 and 2023 present an opportunity for comparison between these surveillance methods. OBJECTIVE To (i) analyze, compare, and contrast the results of active and passive vector surveillance programs; and (ii) explore how well these sources predict human risk of Lyme disease. METHODS Descriptive statistics were performed to evaluate characteristics of each surveillance method with chi square tests or repeated-ANOVA to assess differences in seasonality, life stage, and genus of ticks between different datasets. Correlation to human cases of Lyme disease was analyzed using negative binomial regression models. RESULTS There are differences between the data sources in tick life stage and genus proportions as well as seasonality of tick rates. Active surveillance conducted by the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District (MMCD) using small mammal trapping had a majority of larval I. scapularis ticks. In contrast, passive surveillance by iNaturalist had a majority of adult D. variabilis ticks. Observations in both data sources were skewed to the early third of the tick season, although this was more exaggerated in iNaturalist data. Observations of ticks from both data sources positively correlated with human cases of Lyme disease. CONCLUSIONS Observed differences in tick characteristics between the two data sources may represent real differences between tick populations and human encounters with them. Some differences may be explained by observation, reporting, and sampling biases. Increased observations of ticks at the beginning of the season indicates potential utility of enhanced human Lyme disease surveillance at that time and may apply to other tick-borne disease risk management. These One Health findings signal an opportunity for early identification of high tickborne disease years through integrated active and passive tick surveillance that informs the conduct of human disease surveillance.
In 2015, 67 diseases and conditions were nationally notifiable in Australia. States and territories reported a total of 320,480 notifications of communicable diseases to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System, an increase of 16% on the number of notifications in 2014. In 2015, the most frequently notified diseases were vaccine preventable diseases (147,569 notifications, 46% of total notifications), sexually transmissible infections (95,468 notifications, 30% of total notifications), and gastrointestinal diseases (45,326 notifications, 14% of total notifications). There were 17,337 notifications of bloodborne diseases; 12,253 notifications of vectorborne diseases; 1,815 notifications of other bacterial infections; 710 notifications of zoonoses and 2 notifications of quarantinable diseases.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.