Other
Missed Opportune Children for Immunisation versus Immunisation Defaulters: Why Are They Indistinguishable?
Israel Oluwaseyidayo Idris, Gabriel Omoniyi Ayeni ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This paper discusses the confusion between two concepts in immunisation programmes: Missed Opportunities for Immunisation (MOI) and Immunisation Defaulting. The author argues that these terms are used interchangeably and inappropriately in global health practice, leading to flawed intervention strategies. The paper calls for clearer definitions and guidelines to help low- and middle-income countries improve immunisation coverage and achieve vaccination targets by 2030.
Key points
- MOI and immunisation defaulting are conceptually distinct but are inappropriately used interchangeably in research and practice
- Flawed or misleading strategies based on confused terminology have contributed to inability of low- and middle-income countries to achieve 80% child vaccination coverage
- Insufficient guidelines and unclear definitions on MOI and immunisation defaulting hinder progress in immunisation governance
- The author advocates for streamlined definitions and clearer frameworks to guide immunisation policy and practice globally
- Addressing this conceptual confusion is presented as essential to achieving immunisation coverage targets by 2030
Limitations
This document is a conceptual or opinion piece that does not present new empirical data, study results, or evaluation of specific interventions. It cannot tell us about actual effectiveness of immunisation programmes or provide quantified evidence on coverage outcomes.
Abstract
The two major global immunisation agenda framings (Missed Opportunity for Immunisation, MOI vs Immunisation Defaulting) are interchangeably and inappropriately used in public health research and practice with flawed or misleading strategies recommended and adopted in various settings globally. This is evident in the fact that many opportunities to adopt evidence/findings from immunisation coverage research in policy are grossly missed. Ineffectiveness of inappropriate interventions from biased evidence can discourage and mislead the governance to make radical decisions by discretion. This could be the reason for the inability of low-and middle-income countries to vaccinate 80% of their children and otherwise; this also poses a global health threat to capable nations. The current guideline and information on MOI and immunisation defaulting appear insufficient and a little clarification on it would assist forerunners in immunisation to achieve measurable progress in ensuring good coverage especially in low-and middle-income countries. Consequently, this paper is aimed at addressing this issue in immunisation practice with appropriate recommendations. Optimistically, this will stimulate further discussions, streamline differences, and gear global immunisation governance on the subject matter, to achieve the target coverage by 2030 in low-and middle-income countries.