These potential conflicts of interest are further divided into those that are specific to the vaccine or product under discussion and non-specific where they relate to a different vaccine or product made by the relevant company. During the meeting members with a personal specific interest are asked to leave the room during discussion and decision making. Those with a personal non-specific interest take part in the discussion but not in the decision making. Those with non-personal specific interests can participate in the discussion, unless the chairman rules otherwise but do not take part in decision making and those members with non-personal,

non-specific interests take part in the discussion and decision making. The committee carries out horizon scanning—mainly aimed at identifying vaccines which are likely to be licensed in the next

3–5 years. This allows them to advise on the development selleck screening library of appropriate surveillance in advance of licensure and any research which may be needed to facilitate decision making. For example if costs of a potentially vaccine preventable illness need to be collected or the current burden of disease to be estimated. PD-0332991 supplier The committee frequently has to consider changes to the vaccination schedules—for example where new evidence suggests a change in dose interval or timing would be beneficial. Similarly there may be changes in indications for vaccines due to new evidence and the committee provides advice on this. As part of its work the committee considers data on vaccine coverage and may provide advice in relation to this. However the committee has no role in running the immunisation old programmes. In addition the committee reviews information on potential vaccine adverse events including published studies from the global

literature, reports of studies specifically carried out in the United Kingdom (UK), the routine surveillance of adverse reactions carried out by the Health Protection Agency (HPA) and reports from the surveillance system of the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The committee uses this information to weigh risks and benefits in its decision making but has no regulatory role in relation to vaccines (see case study on the Hib booster campaign in Table 1). The work of the committee which attracts the most attention is related to newly licensed vaccines. This is discussed in the next two sections. Where a new vaccine or an alteration to the routine schedule is to be discussed by the main committee the first step taken is to establish an expert sub-committee. This has a member of the main JCVI as the chairman and any additional members of the main committee who have particular expertise relevant to the vaccination being considered. Other members of this sub-committee are then recruited with relevant expertise from academia, government agencies, etc. This is done to ensure that all of the necessary disciplines are represented—e.g.