What is the best method of prevention for the transmission of vaccine-preventable diseases brainly

The concept of a ‘global public good’ is an economic idea that at its simplest, refers to products, ideas, policies or issues with effects that could extend to everyone, everywhere. Despite its name, this actually has nothing to do with good or bad effects, as the word “good” here refers to products, rather than something that is beneficial or positive. In the context of health, this usually means programmes, policies and services that have a truly global impact on health, usually positive impacts, even though those benefits or costs may not be equitable across the world.

So slightly confusingly perhaps, a global public good can involve something that is good or bad – it is something that can have benefits or costs that reach the entire world. Global warming is a useful example of an issue that is a global public good that has disastrously negative effects for the entire world.

Global public goods must be non-rivalrous – meaning that using it doesn’t reduce the amount for anyone else, although activities or interventions concerning it may well be. They must also be non-excludable, meaning that it should be impossible to prevent anyone else from getting the benefits. Films are an example of a good that is non-rivalrous – one person enjoying a film doesn’t affect how someone else enjoys it – but it can be excludable from someone who doesn’t pay to access the film.

Global public goods in healthcare

Organisations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) provide a range of global public goods, in the form of open access publications, standards (e.g. the International Classification of Disease), guidelines (e.g. for HIV treatment in resource-poor settings), assessments (e.g. pre-qualification of drugs and vaccines), coordinating frameworks (e.g. Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance), voluntary normative guidance (e.g. Code of Conduct on Marketing of Breastmilk Substitute) or binding international law (e.g. the International Health Regulations and the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control).

Disease eradication meets the criteria of both being non-rivalrous and non-excludable. The eradication of a vaccine-preventable disease, such as smallpox, qualifies since everyone benefits, whether or not they contributed to the eradication effort.

Read more: Gavi's Vaccine support

Who governs and finances global public goods?

Clearly, unlike non-health-related global public goods, such as sunlight, which exists without human intervention, the provision of some health-related ones need sustained planning and financing. Their provision is not automatically assured.

Financing brings issues both of coordination and of governance – who is in charge of a global public good, who decides the priorities, and who decides where the money goes?

In some instances, where sovereign interests can’t be coordinated easily for a global goal that is much needed, international agencies have taken the reins, often along with philanthropic funding. Gavi’s mission is a good example of this, in which a core group of partners decided to innovate ways to ensure that childhood vaccination would be available to anyone who needs it. It is also a prime example of a public-private partnership taking a private good (a vaccine) and making it public.

To ensure sustainable financing, some global health academics like Suerie Moon at Harvard, and others, have suggested a Global Fund for Public Goods (GFPG), in to which all countries would contribute to fund, for instance, R&D with a global reach. Ensuring all countries contribute to such a fund can be challenging because global public goods can be undermined by “free riders”, who essentially want to reap the benefits without contributing as much as might be needed – free-riding off the goodwill and contributions of others.

Read more: Gavi's Innovative financing

Vaccines as a global public good

While disease eradication as a whole is a global public good, it becomes more complex when you look specifically at health products. Drugs and vaccines are often both rivalrous and excludable – for example, if prices are set so high that low- and middle-income countries can’t afford to buy them, or if there are supply issues.

However, as Moon and colleagues point out: “excludability is not immutable”, and societal and political decisions can influence whether or not a good is made non-excludable. Researchers, for example, could publish their work in a journal that has a paywall or one that has open-access, and similarly, scientists could decide to patent a technology or make it free to use, depending on the circumstances. 

This ability to make private goods or products public, when the right to health demands it, was reflected in the lead up to this year’s World Health Assembly (WHA). Countries debated whether there should be a reference to global public goods in a UN resolution, the “International cooperation to ensure global access to medicines, vaccines and medical equipment to face COVID-19”. UNAIDS called for a “People’s vaccine” against COVID-19 that would be available to everyone, in all countries, free of charge. The UN General Assembly resolution ended up including global public goods as a concept in this way: “the role of extensive immunisation against COVID-19 as a global public good for health in preventing, containing and stopping transmission in order to bring the pandemic to an end, once safe, quality, efficacious, effective, accessible and affordable vaccines are available…”

Read more: COVAX

To enact this resolution and ensure mandatory worldwide sharing of all COVID-19-related knowledge, data and technologies, countries will most likely need to make full use of agreed safeguards and flexibilities in the World Trade Organization Doha Declaration on the TRIPS and Public Health, to protect access to medicines for all. These are agreements that allow countries to lift patents on medicines if it is in the public interest, as Brazil did with antiretrovirals in 2007, although this was not an easy process for the country and brought a significant backlash from pharmaceutical companies.

When it comes to vaccines, the call to make them affordable and available to everyone, everywhere – essentially, to make vaccines a global public good – is embedded in the idea of universal health coverage. In a world living with concurrent severe epidemics of cholera and measles, and now dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for affordable and available vaccines is more urgent than ever. 

  1. Bunker JP, Frazier HS, Mosteller F. Improving health: measuring effects of medical care. Milbank Q. 1994;72(2):225–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Ten great public health achievements--United States, 1900–1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1999;48:241–3.

  3. Dube E, Laberge C, Guay M, Bramadat P, Roy R, Bettinger J. Vaccine hesitancy: an overview. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013;9(8):1763–73.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. World Health Organization. Immunization summary - A statistical reference containing data through 2010. Geneva: WHO; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Omer SB, Salmon DA, Orenstein WA, Dehart MP, Halsey N. Vaccine refusal, mandatory immunization, and the risks of vaccine-preventable diseases. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1981–8. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa0806477.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Oostvogel PM, van Wijngaarden JK, van der Avoort HGAM, Mulders MN, Conyn-van Spaendonck MAE, Rümke HC, et al. Poliomyelitis outbreak in an unvaccinated community in The Netherlands, 1992–93. Lancet. 1994;344:665–70. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(94)92091-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Notes from the field: Pertussis—California, January–June 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010;59:817.

  8. Falagas ME, Zarkadoulia E. Factors associated with suboptimal compliance to vaccinations in children in developed countries: a systematic review. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24:1719–41. doi:10.1185/03007990802085692.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kennedy A, Lavail K, Nowak G, Basket M, Landry S. Confidence about vaccines in the United States: understanding parents’ perceptions. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30:1151–9. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wu AC, Wisler-Sher DJ, Griswold K, Colson E, Shapiro ED, Holmboe ES, et al. Postpartum mothers’ attitudes, knowledge, and trust regarding vaccination. Matern Child Health J. 2008;12:766–73. doi:10.1007/s10995-007-0302-4.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shetty P. Experts concerned about vaccination backlash. Lancet. 2010;375:970–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Larson HJ, Schulz WS, Tucker JD, Smith DMD. Measuring Vaccine Confidence: Introducing a Global Vaccine Confidence Index. PLOS Currents Outbreaks. 2015. Edition 1. doi: 10.1371/currents.outbreaks.ce0f6177bc97332602a8e3fe7d7f7cc4.

  13. World Health Organization. Report of the SAGE working group on Vaccine Hesitancy. 2014. Available from: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2014/october/1_Report_WORKING_GROUP_vaccine_hesitancy_final.pdf. Accessed on 15/04/2015

  14. Gust D, Brown C, Sheedy K, Hibbs B, Weaver D, Nowak G. Immunization attitudes and beliefs among parents: beyond a dichotomous perspective. Am J Health Behav. 2005;29:81–92. doi:10.5993/AJHB.29.1.7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Keane MT, Walter MV, Patel BI, Moorthy S, Stevens RB, Bradley KM, et al. Confidence in vaccination: a parent model. Vaccine. 2005;23:2486–93. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2004.10.026.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Benin AL, Wisler-Scher DJ, Colson E, Shapiro ED, Holmboe ES. Qualitative analysis of mothers’ decision-making about vaccines for infants: the importance of trust. Pediatrics. 2006;117:1532–41. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-1728.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Larson HJ, Jarrett C, Eckersberger E, Smith DMD, Paterson P. Understanding vaccine hesitancy around vaccines and vaccination from a global perspective: A systematic review of published literature, 2007–2012. Vaccine. 2014;32:2150–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Stefanoff P, Mamelund SE, Robinson M, Netterlid E, Tuells J, Bergsaker MA, et al. VACSATC working group on standardization of attitudinal studies in Europe Tracking parental attitudes on vaccination across European countries: The Vaccine Safety, Attitudes, Training and Communication Project (VACSATC). Vaccine. 2010;28:5731–7. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.06.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Streefland P, Chowdhury AMR, Ramos-Jimenez P. Patterns of vaccination acceptance. Soc Sci Med. 1999;49:1705–16. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00239-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kata A. Anti-vaccine activists, Web 2.0, and the postmodern paradigm--an overview of tactics and tropes used online by the anti-vaccination movement. Vaccine. 2012;30:3778–89. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.11.112.

  21. Kane MA. Commentary: public perception and the safety of immunization. Vaccine. 1998;16(Suppl):S73–5. doi:10.1016/S0264-410X(98)00302-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gowda C, Dempsey AF. The rise (and fall?) of parental vaccine hesitancy. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013;9(8):1755–62.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Leask J, Kinnersley P, Jackson C, Cheater F, Bedford H, Rowles G. Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals. BMC Pediatr. 2012;12:154. doi:10.1186/1471-2431-12-154.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Clark SJ, Cowan AE, Wortley PM. Influenza vaccination attitudes and practices among US registered nurses. Am J Infect Control. 2009;37:551–6. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2009.02.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hollmeyer HG, Hayden F, Poland G, Buchholz U. Influenza vaccination of health care workers in hospitals--a review of studies on attitudes and predictors. Vaccine. 2009;27:3935–44. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.03.056.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Posfay-Barbe KM, Heininger U, Aebi C, Desgrandchamps D, Vaudaux B, Siegrist CA. How do physicians immunize their own children? Differences among pediatricians and nonpediatricians. Pediatrics. 2005;116:e623–33. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-0885.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Barrows MA, Coddington JA, Richards EA, Aaltonen PM. Parental Vaccine Hesitancy: Clinical Implications for Pediatric Providers. J Pediatr Health Care. 2015;29(4):385–94. doi:10.1016/j.pedhc.2015.04.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Leib S, Liberatos P, Edwards K. Pediatricians’ experience with and response to parental vaccine safety concerns and vaccine refusals: a survey of Connecticut pediatricians. Public Health Rep. 2011;126 Suppl 2:13–23.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hobson-West P. ‘Trusting blindly can be the biggest risk of all’: organised resistance to childhood vaccination in the UK. Sociol Health Illn. 2007;29:198–215. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.00544.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Healy CM, Pickering LK. How to communicate with vaccine-hesitant parents. Pediatrics. 2011;127 Suppl 1:S127–33. doi:10.1542/peds.2010-1722S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Henrikson NB, Opel DJ, Grothaus L, Nelson J, Scrol A, Dunn J. Physician communication training and parental vaccine hesitancy: a randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2015;136:70–9 .

  32. Sturm LA, Mays RM, Zimet GD. Parental beliefs and decision making about child and adolescent immunization: from polio to sexually transmitted infections. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2005;26:441–52. doi:10.1097/00004703-200512000-00009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lantos JD, Jackson MA, Opel DJ, Marcuse EK, Myers AL, Connelly BL. Controversies in vaccine mandates. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care. 2010;40:38–58. doi:10.1016/j.cppeds.2010.01.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kennedy AM, Brown CJ, Gust DA. Vaccine beliefs of parents who oppose compulsory vaccination. Public Health Rep. 2005;120:252–8.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Plotkin SA. Lessons learned concerning vaccine safety. Vaccine. 2002;20(Suppl 1):S16–, 9. doi: 10.1016/S0264-410X(01)00303-6

  36. Batson A. Sustainable introduction of affordable new vaccines: the targeting strategy. Vaccine. 1998;16(Suppl):S93–8. doi:10.1016/S0264-410X(98)00306-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schwartz JL, Caplan AL. Vaccination refusal: ethics, individual rights, and the common good. Prim Care. 2011;38:717–28. doi:10.1016/j.pop.2011.07.009. ix.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Gust DA, Darling N, Kennedy A, Schwartz B. Parents with doubts about vaccines: which vaccines and reasons why. Pediatrics. 2008;122:718–25. doi:10.1542/peds.2007-0538.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bedford H, Lansley M. More vaccines for children? Parents’ views. Vaccine. 2007;25:7818–23. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.08.057.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Gangarosa EJ, Galazka AM, Wolfe CR, Phillips LM, Gangarosa RE, Miller E, et al. Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: the untold story. Lancet. 1998;351:356–61. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)04334-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Mason BW, Donnelly PD. Impact of a local newspaper campaign on the uptake of the measles mumps and rubella vaccine. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000;54:473–4. doi:10.1136/jech.54.6.473.

    PubMed Central  Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Wolfe RM, Sharp LK, Lipsky MS. Content and design attributes of antivaccination web sites. JAMA. 2002;287:3245–8. doi:10.1001/jama.287.24.3245.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Zimmerman RK, Wolfe RM, Fox DE, Fox JR, Nowalk MP, Troy JA, et al. Vaccine criticism on the World Wide Web. J Med Internet Res. 2005;7, e17. doi:10.2196/jmir.7.2.e17.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Witteman HO, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. The defining characteristics of Web 2.0 and their potential influence in the online vaccination debate. Vaccine. 2012;30:3734–40. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.12.039.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Scullard P, Peacock C, Davies P. Googling children’s health: reliability of medical advice on the internet. Arch Dis Child. 2010;95:580–2. doi:10.1136/adc.2009.168856.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Kata A. A postmodern Pandora’s box: anti-vaccination misinformation on the Internet. Vaccine. 2010;28:1709–16. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.12.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Diethelm P, McKee M. Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond? Eur J Public Health. 2009;19:2–4. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckn139.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Dubé E, Bettinger JA, Halperin B, Bradet R, Lavoie F, Sauvageau C, et al. Determinants of parents’ decision to vaccinate their children against rotavirus: results of a longitudinal study. Health Educ Res. 2012;27:1069–80. doi:10.1093/her/cys088.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Betsch C, Renkewitz F, Betsch T, Ulshöfer C. The influence of vaccine-critical websites on perceiving vaccination risks. J Health Psychol. 2010;15:446–55. doi:10.1177/1359105309353647.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. François G, Duclos P, Margolis H, Lavanchy D, Siegrist CA, Meheus A, et al. Vaccine safety controversies and the future of vaccination programs. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005;24:953–61. doi:10.1097/01.inf.0000183853.16113.a6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Nair H, Hazarika I, Patwari A. A roller-coaster ride: Introduction of pentavalent vaccine in India. J Glob Health. 2011;1(1):32–5.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Smith PJ, Humiston SG, Marcuse EK, Zhao Z, Dorell CG, Howes C, et al. Parental delay or refusal of vaccine doses, childhood vaccination coverage at 24 months of age, and the Health Belief Model. Public Health Rep. 2011;126 Suppl 2:135–46.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Kennedy A, Basket M, Sheedy K. Vaccine attitudes, concerns, and information sources reported by parents of young children: results from the 2009 HealthStyles survey. Pediatrics. 2011;127 Suppl 1:S92–9. doi:10.1542/peds.2010-1722N.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Kaliner E, Moran-Gilad J, Grotto I, Somekh E, Kopel E, Gdalevich M et al. Silent reintroduction of wild-type poliovirus to Israel, 2013 – risk communication challenges in an argumentative atmosphere. Euro Surveill. 2014;19(7): http://dx.doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES2014.19.7.20703

  55. Velan B, Boyko V, Lerner-Geva L, Ziv A, Yagar Y, Kaplan G. Individualism, acceptance and differentiation as attitude traits in the public’s response to vaccination. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2012;8(9):1272–82. doi:10.4161/hv.21183.

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Mills E, Jadad AR, Ross C, Wilson K. Systematic review of qualitative studies exploring parental beliefs and attitudes toward childhood vaccination identifies common barriers to vaccination. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:1081–8. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.09.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Nowak GJ, Gellin BG, MacDonald NE, Butler R; SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy. Addressing vaccine hesitancy: The potential value of commercial and social marketing principles and practices. Vaccine. 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.039.


Page 2

Skip to main content

From: Vaccine hesitancy: understanding better to address better

S.no Researchers Terms
1. Gust et al. (Parental attitudes regarding vaccination) Immunization advocates
The go alongs to get alongs
Health advocates
Fence sitters
Worried
2. Keane et al. (Parent profiles) Vaccine believer: parents who are convinced of the benefits of vaccination
Cautious: parents emotionally involved with their child and who have an hard time watching them being vaccinated
Relaxed: parents who were characterized by some scepticism about vaccines
Unconvinced: parents who distrusted vaccinations and vaccination policy
3. Benin et al. (Mother’s attitudes and actions) Accepters: who agreed with or did not question vaccination
Vaccine-hesitant: who accepted vaccination but had significant concerns about vaccinating their infants
Late vaccinators: who purposely delayed vaccinating or chose only some vaccines
Rejecters: who completely rejected vaccination