RM analysis Kati Iso-Markku

Group 1

The purpose of Group 1´s study is to evaluate the impact of vaccination in Finland and if it was a right decision to vaccinate the whole population. They are thinking about if in contrast to vaccinating everybody only risk groups would have been vaccinetad or nobody would have been vaccinated. They will look at data from Finland where vaccination was recommended for whole population and Mexico where vaccinations were not done. A lot of information is needed before calculations can be done and this would be a long and thorough analysis.

Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

• Relevance: The content of the study analysis is relevant in relation to the purpose. It effectively takes into account the different variables influencing the outcomes.
• Pertinence: The analysis is done after the epidemic to help understand if the right decisions were made. This will help in the future if similar situations occur and it will also give useful information that can be shared with the public. The public interest is very high concerning the decisions that were made during the swine flu pandemic and the ministry is held responsible, therefore we need to show that we are evaluating the actions and decisions that were taken.
• Usability:The idea of the analysis is easy to grasp, but there are many variables and much information that needs to be gathered before the actual analysis could be done. But it gives a good idea about the things that were/would have been influencing on the outcomes. When the analysis is done, it would increse the undestanding of the swine flu case as a whole.
• Acceptability: If all information is gathered from reliable sources and there are precise estimations, the results would be acceptable to the ministry

Perspective of a journalist

• Relevance: The analysis seems very thorough and would propably be sufficient for the stated purposes.
• Pertinence: The purpose of the analysis is relevant to my needs, because there is still huge public interest towards the swine flu case.
• Usability:I can somewhat grasp the main idea, but the analysis as a whole seems very large with many different things influencing on it.
• Acceptability: The results of the analysis would be acceptable if it is done without pressure from the ministry.

Group 2

The purpose of the study analysis by group 2 is to evaluate the impact of vaccination on the swine flu pandemic in Finland and the individuals who will be vaccinated. They are looking into the possible decisions of vaccinating everybody (total coverage) or vaccinating only risk groups (75 % coverage). Major interest is on the number of new swine flu cases before and after vaccination and on the possible adverse effects caused by the vaccine. Analysis is done between june 2009 and the year 2011, so results and possible decisions would be done after the swine flu pandemic.

Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

• Relevance: The purpose is stated to be analysis of the impact of vaccination on swine flu. The actual study question is not presented and this makes the purpose a bit vague, but the content of the analysis seems relevant.
• Pertinence: The purpose of the analysis is relevant to the Ministry, because it is important to know the actual impacts of vaccination.
• Usability: The idea of the analysis is not completely clear because there seems to be some differences in the stated purpose and the actual analysis, scenarios and decision variables. If this analysis provides data about if vaccination with total coverage or only within risk groups is a better solution, this analysis can be very useful to the ministry in the future.
• Acceptability: The results of group 2´s analysis are not shown, but based on the information about the methods of calculating the results the Ministry would accept the results of this analysis.

Perspective of a journalist

• Relevance: The purpose of the analysis seems relevant to the content.
• Pertinence: As a journalist I am very interested to know if good results would have been achievable with a smaller portion of population being subjected to the vaccine and to it´s possible adverse effects.
• Usability: The purpose part of the analysis seems not to fit completely with the rest of the analysis, but understand the idea in the other parts very well. With an incomplete analysis it is difficult to say how much it would increase my understanding on the matter of swine flu.
• Acceptability: The groups states in the beginning of the analysis that they aim to support the decision to vaccine. This gives an impression that the analysis is not done objectively, so I wouldn´t accept the results very easily.

Group 3

Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

• Relevance:
• Pertinence:
• Usability:
• Acceptability:

Perspective of a journalist

• Relevance:
• Pertinence:
• Usability:
• Acceptability:

Group 4

Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

• Relevance:
• Pertinence:
• Usability:
• Acceptability:

Perspective of a journalist

• Relevance:
• Pertinence:
• Usability:
• Acceptability:

Overall Statements

Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

• Group 1:This analysis would hold great value in the evaluation of the Ministry itself.
• Group 2: We hope for more information on the analysis and more precise purpose definition, but the idea of the plan is good and would provide valuable results to the Ministry in future situations.
• Group 3:
• Group 4:

Journalist

• Group 1:There has been a lot of speculation about the decisions and actions by the health care officials during the swine flu pandemic. The press and the public are interested to know if it was a right decision to vaccinate the whole population. This analysis would be highly valuable.
• Group 2: The analysis done by group 2 is not finished so it´s value is still unclear. The whole analysis might be done objectively, so I would look into the backgrounds of the people participating in this analysis and concentrate on what they are trying to achieve and why.
• Group 3:
• Group 4:

Evaluation of the swine flu/narcolepsy model

• Relevance:
• Pertinence:
• Usability:
• Acceptability: