October 2007 NVAC Meeting Minutes
Dr. Gellin began the discussion by asking Dr. Strikas to provide more information on how he plans to deal with the focus groups and what the purpose of the focus groups is. Dr. Strikas explained that the focus groups have been stratified into four different groups of people: Mothers of young children, women who may be mothers in the future, younger adults 35-54 years of age, and senior citizens 60 years of age and older. NVPO will spend about an hour and a half with each of the groups. They will introduce the topic of public health by introducing CDC’s top 10 list of public health achievements for the 20th century, one of which is vaccinations. They will tell the groups that this is what the Government thinks is important and will ask for their opinion and for them to rank these achievements. They will then go through the same exercise with the top 11 priorities on vaccination that were previously mentioned. The town hall meetings would involve similar activities as well as presentations of additional material and small group discussion as they last 5 to 6 hours.
Dr. Feinberg continued the discussion by asking how the National Vaccine Plan influences the activities of the Federal agencies and to what extent the progress toward achieving those goals is tracked. Dr. Strikas explained that the last plan did nothing to advance the future of the agencies. This is why the revised plan is going to be prioritized, have accountability, and set milestones. Dr. Strikas also explained that this should not be just a Government activity, which is why IOM is going to be involved to solicit non-government input, and make this a national plan, not solely a Government plan.
Review of Priorities in the National Vaccine Plan—Ms. Alina Baciu
Ms. Alina Baciu began her presentation by explaining that the IOM is in the process of developing a new committee that will consist of 12 members with various areas of expertise. In addition to members with expertise in the areas of medicine, epidemiology, public health, public policy, vaccinology, and decision analysis, she also mentioned the importance of having members with expertise in the areas of safety, legal issues, and immunology. The committee’s task is to review and make recommendations regarding an update of the National Vaccine Plan. The Committee will hold workshops with national expert stakeholders to review a draft update of the plan and will prepare a report with conclusions and recommendations about priority actions within the major components of the draft plan. Ms. Baciu said that a Web site and listserv will be established.
Ms. Baciu said that NVAC’s input is needed in terms of the categories of stakeholders that should be looked at and specific names of stakeholders and possible Committee members that should be considered. She also said that input was needed in terms of NVAC’s role during the study. She hopes that NVAC representatives will be able to attend and possibly address the IOM committee during some of its meetings. The e-mail address for the project is firstname.lastname@example.org for further questions and comments.
Dr. Humiston began the discussion by stating that experts in communication should be invited to participate in the Committee as they were left out. She also mentioned that in terms of epidemiology, one form of surveillance that was left out was surveillance on stakeholder knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs. Dr. Hosbach also asked that a representative from a vaccine manufacturer be considered as part of the stakeholder group for the IOM panel.
Dr. Freed asked whether Ms. Baciu had a way in which she wanted NVAC to be engaged in this project. She replied that NVAC’s role is not clear at this point but that once the IOM Committee convenes, that is something they can discuss. One possible role for NVAC would be to assign someone to serve as a liaison for the IOM Committee that could attend all public meetings and speak about issues relevant to NVAC.