Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Advisory Committees”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Impact of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' 4-day grace period in a low-income community.

BACKGROUND: In 2002, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended vaccine doses administered < or = 4 days before the minimum age or interval be counted as valid. The study objective was to assess the impact of the 4-day grace period on the need for revaccination and associated costs in a low-income community, compared to standard practice (i.e., repeating all doses that fall outside current ACIP guidelines). METHODS: From 1999 to 2001, semi-annual immunization assessments of 8293 randomly selected children, aged 19-35 months, were conducted at a 16-practice network serving an underserved community in New York City. Outcome measures were rates of antigen-specific invalid doses and number of children needing revaccination, with and without the 4-day grace period. Revaccination costs were based on the Vaccines for Children (VFC) price list. RESULTS: The 4-day grace period reduced the number of children needing revaccination from 17.1% to 12.0%, a drop of 30%. The rates of invalid doses decreased from 1.9% to 1.3%, a drop of 33%. Invalid doses for hepatitis B (HepB)-2 decreased by two thirds (69.7%); for diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP)-1, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)-1 and Hib-3 by half (44.9%-50.0%); for Polio-1, Polio-2, Polio-3, and measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) by one third (31.6%-33.3%); and for DTaP-2, DTaP-3, HepB-3, and varicella by nearly one quarter (20.0%-24.0%). At these rates, revaccinating 100,000 children younger than age 3 years would cost 213,588 dollars per year, compared to 152,539 dollars with the 4-day grace period, in vaccine costs alone. CONCLUSIONS: In a low-income community, ACIP's 4-day grace period made a significant impact on the number of children requiring revaccination and on revaccination costs. However, the number of children needing revaccination remains high.

Child, Preschool↗
PubMed1999

Research in the Veterans Health Administration: the report of the Research Realignment Advisory Committee.

In 1995 the Under Secretary for Health of the Department of Veterans Affairs constituted the Research Realignment Advisory Committee and charged it with reviewing the VA's research program. After meeting in 1995 and 1996, the committee identified 12 findings, which fall into four broad categories: allocation of research resources among VA research programs, acquisition and protection of resources, stability and maintenance of infrastructure, and outreach and communications. The most far-reaching recommendation was to establish designated research areas so that VA research could be focused more sharply on the specific needs of veterans while maintaining a research base for relatively less common conditions and needs integral to the VA's mission. The second major issue was that research funding should be increased (because it had fallen in inflation-adjusted dollars while the cost of doing research continued to rise). The third major area dealt with operational issues about how research was administered in the newly created system of geographically defined "veterans integrated service networks" and at the medical centers and how research monies flowed to medical centers. The final major area had to do with career development, for the committee considered the recruitment and retention of outstanding junior investigators to be a core function of VA research. The committee's recommendations, some of which have already been implemented, form the basis for strengthening the VA's research enterprise and for fully integrating it within the new structure of health care delivery in the VA.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2006

Maintaining standards in surgical training: how effective is the accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee in the United Kingdom?

In order to assess the efficacy of inspection and accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee for higher surgical training in orthopaedic surgery and trauma, seven training regions with 109 hospitals and 433 Specialist Registrars were studied over a period of two years. There were initial deficiencies in a mean of 14.8% of required standards (10.3% to 19.2%). This improved following completion of the inspection, with a mean residual deficiency in 8.9% (6.5% to 12.7%.) Overall, 84% of standards were checked, 68% of the units improved and training was withdrawn in 4%. Most units (97%) were deficient on initial assessment. Moderately good rectification was achieved but the process of follow-up and collection of data require improvement. There is an imbalance between the setting of standards and their implementation. Any major revision of the process of accreditation by the new Post-graduate Medical Education and Training Board should recognise the importance of assessment of training by direct inspection on site, of the relationship between service and training, and the advantage of defining mandatory and developmental standards.

Accreditation↗
PubMed2001

[Childhood immunization schedule 2001-2002. Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Pediatrics].

In 1994 the Spanish Association of Pediatrics founded the Advisory Committee on Vaccines with the aim of providing advice on matters related to childhood immunizations and of implementing vaccination schedules. The latest recommendations concern the immunization schedule for 2001-2002, in which indications for the inactivated poliovirus vaccine instead of the attenuated poliovirus vaccine are of prime importance. The advisability of including the vaccine against chicken pox in healthy children is stressed.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Vaccine development to prevent cytomegalovirus disease: report from the National Vaccine Advisory Committee.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is the most common intrauterine infection in the United States, and it exacts a heavy toll when it infects children and immunocompromised individuals. A CMV vaccine was assigned the highest priority by the Institute of Medicine in its 1999 assessment of targets for vaccine development. The priority was based on the cost and human suffering that would be alleviated by reducing the disease burden of congenital CMV infection. The National Vaccine Advisory Committee and invited experts examined the prospects for a CMV vaccine and the actions needed to bring about successful vaccine development at a National Vaccine Program Office workshop in October 2000. This article summarizes information about the changing epidemiology of CMV and immune responses to infection and immunity, and it reviews the current status of several vaccine candidates. Support of government agencies for CMV vaccine research and development is critical to address this need.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Prevention of varicella: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

These recommendations represent the first statement by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on the use of live, attenuated varicella virus vaccine--VARIVAX--manufactured by Merck and Company, Inc. and licensed in March 1995 for use in healthy persons > or = 12 months of age. In addition to presenting information regarding vaccine, this statement updates previous recommendations concerning the use of varicella zoster immune globulin (VZIG) as prophylaxis against varicella (MMWR 1984; 33:84-90, 95-100).

Acyclovir↗
PubMed1999

The World Health Organization classification of neoplastic diseases of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. Report of the Clinical Advisory Committee meeting, Airlie House, Virginia, November, 1997.

INTRODUCTION: Since 1995, the European Association of Pathologists (EAHP) and the Society for Hematopathology (SH) have been developing a new World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of hematologic malignancies. The classification includes lymphoid, myeloid, histiocytic, and mast cell neoplasms. DESIGN: The WHO project involves 10 committees of pathologists, who have developed lists and definitions of disease entities. A Clinical Advisory Committee (CAC)) of international hematologists and oncologists was formed to ensure that the classification will be useful to clinicians. A meeting was held in November, 1997, to discuss clinical issues related to the classification. RESULTS: The WHO has adopted the 'Revised European American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms' (R.E.A.L.), published in 1994 by the International Lymphoma Study Group (ILSG), as the classification of lymphoid neoplasms. This approach to classification is based on the principle that a classification is a list of 'real' disease entities, which are defined by a combination of morphology, immunophenotype, genetic features, and clinical features. The relative importance of each of these features varies among diseases, and there is no one 'gold standard'. The WHO Classification has applied the principles of the R.E.A.L. Classification to myeloid and histiocytic neoplasms. The classification of myeloid neoplasms recognizes distinct entities defined by a combination of morphology and cytogenetic abnormalities. The CAC meeting, which was organized around a series of clinical questions, was able to reach a consensus on most of the questions posed. The questions and the consensus are discussed in detail below. Among other things, the CAC concluded that clinical groupings of lymphoid neoplasms were neither necessary nor desirable. Patient treatment is determined by the specific type of lymphoma, with the addition of grade within the tumor type, if applicable, and clinical prognostic factors such as the international prognostic index (IPI). CONCLUSION: The experience of developing the WHO Classification has produced a new and exciting degree of cooperation and communication between oncologists and pathologists from around the world, which should facilitate progress in the understanding and treatment of hematologic malignancies.

Hematologic Neoplasms↗
PubMed2000

The World Health Organization classification of neoplasms of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues: report of the Clinical Advisory Committee meeting--Airlie House, Virginia, November, 1997.

INTRODUCTION: Since 1995, the European Association of Pathologists and the Society for Hematopathology have been developing a new World Health Organization (WHO) classification of hematologic malignancies. The classification includes lymphoid, myeloid, histiocytic, and mast cell neoplasms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The WHO project involves ten committees of pathologists, who have developed lists and definitions of disease entities. A Clinical Advisory Committee (CAC) of international hematologists and oncologists was formed to ensure that the classification will be useful to clinicians. A meeting was held in November 1997 to discuss clinical issues related to the classification. RESULTS: WHO has adopted the 'Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms' (REAL), published in 1994 by the International Lymphoma Study Group (ILSG), as the classification of lymphoid neoplasms. This approach to classification is based on the principle that a classification is a list of 'real' disease entities, which are defined by a combination of morphology, immunophenotype, genetic features, and clinical features. The relative importance of each of these features varies among diseases, and there is no one 'gold standard'. The WHO classification has applied the principles of the REAL classification to myeloid and histiocytic neoplasms. The classification of myeloid neoplasms recognizes distinct entities defined by a combination of morphology and cytogenetic abnormalities. The CAC meeting, which was organized around a series of clinical questions, was able to reach a consensus on most of the questions posed. The questions and the consensus are discussed in detail below. Among other things, the CAC concluded that clinical groupings of lymphoid neoplasms were neither necessary nor desirable. Patient treatment is determined by the specific type of lymphoma, with the addition of grade within the tumor type, if applicable, and clinical prognostic factors such as the international prognostic index (IPI). CONCLUSION: The experience of developing the WHO classification has produced a new and exciting degree of cooperation and communication between oncologists and pathologists from around the world, which should facilitate progress in the understanding and treatment of hematologic malignancies.

Hematologic Neoplasms↗
PubMed2000

The World Health Organization classification of neoplastic diseases of the haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues: Report of the Clinical Advisory Committee Meeting, Airlie House, Virginia, November 1997.

INTRODUCTION: Since 1995, the European Association of Pathologists (EAHP) and the Society for Hematopathology (SH) have been developing a new World Health Organization (WHO) classification of haematological malignancies. The classification includes lymphoid, myeloid, histiocytic and mast cell neoplasms. DESIGN: The WHO project involves 10 committees of pathologists, who have developed lists and definitions of disease entities. A Clinical Advisory Committee (CAC) of international haematologists and oncologists was formed to ensure that the classification will be useful to clinicians. A meeting was held in November 1997 to discuss clinical issues related to the classification. RESULTS: The WHO has adopted the 'Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms' (REAL), published in 1994 by the International Lymphoma Study Group (ILSG), as the classification of lymphoid neoplasms. This approach to classification is based on the principle that a classification is a list of 'real' disease entities, which are defined by a combination of morphology, immunophenotype, genetic features and clinical features. The relative importance of each of these features varies among diseases, and there is no one 'gold standard'. The WHO classification has applied the principles of the REAL classification to myeloid and histiocytic neoplasms. The classification of myeloid neoplasms recognizes distinct entities defined by a combination of morphology and cytogenetic abnormalities. The CAC meeting, which was organized around a series of clinical questions, was able to reach a consensus on most of the questions posed. The questions and the consensus are discussed in detail below. Among other things, the CAC concluded that clinical groupings of lymphoid neoplasms was neither necessary nor desirable. Patient treatment is determined by the specific type of lymphoma, with the addition of grade within the tumour type, if applicable, and clinical prognostic factors such as the international prognostic index (IPI). CONCLUSION: The experience of developing the WHO classification has produced a new and exciting degree of cooperation and communication between oncologists and pathologists from around the world, which should facilitate progress in the understanding and treatment of haematological malignancies.

Hematologic Neoplasms↗