Mandatory and recommended vaccination in the EU, Iceland and Norway: results of the VENICE 2010 survey on the ways of implementing national vaccination programmes
Eurosurveillance·
- DOI
- 10.2807/ese.17.22.20183-en
- PMID
- 22687916
- PMCID
- —
- OpenAlex
- W1512559461
- Study type
- Guideline
- Publisher
- European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (ECDC)
- Article type
- journal-article
- Integrity
- current
Why this research matters now
The findings provide comparative information about European vaccination strategies, suggesting that understanding diverse approaches may help countries adapt their programmes. High compliance has been achieved in many European programmes using only recommendations rather than mandates.
Structured evidence summary
Research question
The study examined how national vaccination programmes are implemented across EU Member States, Iceland, and Norway, focusing on whether vaccinations are recommended or mandatory.
Study design
A survey was conducted in 2010 by the VENICE network among project gatekeepers from all 27 EU Member States, Iceland, and Norway.
Population and setting
The survey covered 29 countries: all 27 European Union Member States as of 2010, plus Iceland and Norway.
Main findings
Fifteen countries had no mandatory vaccinations, while 14 had at least one mandatory vaccine. Polio vaccination was mandatory in 12 countries, diphtheria and tetanus in 11, and hepatitis B in 10. For eight of the 15 vaccines examined, some countries used a mixed approach of recommended and mandatory vaccination.
Public-health relevance
The findings provide comparative information about European vaccination strategies, suggesting that understanding diverse approaches may help countries adapt their programmes. High compliance has been achieved in many European programmes using only recommendations rather than mandates.
Important limitations
This summary relies on the supplied single-article abstract and metadata. The original paper is required for decision-grade interpretation of survey methodology, response completeness, and specific country-level implementation details.
GIDS interpretation
This article would be discoverable through queries about vaccination policy, mandatory immunization programmes, or comparative health system strategies in European settings. It provides context for understanding how different jurisdictions structure vaccine delivery.
Related GIDS surveillance
Literature context does not validate, explain, or change a surveillance signal. Exact and contextual relationships are shown separately.
Evidence relationships
This article has 13 auditable classifier relationships to diseases, places, topics, and study design.