WHO South-East Asia Regional Office, in
collaboration with WHO Headquarters and the Prasanna School of Public Health at
the Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), and with support from the
Wellcome Trust, developed a draft report on the Immunization and Vaccine
Research Taxonomy. To validate key findings and seek expert perspectives on
critical elements of the framework, WHO SEARO convened a virtual global
consultation bringing together leading immunization experts from around the
world.
The discussion drew upon the extensive
multi-phase work undertaken to develop the taxonomy, including rapid scoping
review, stakeholder mapping, key informant interviews, and multiple rounds of
expert feedback. Participants acknowledged the rigor of the process and
appreciated the effort to bring structure and coherence to the diverse and
rapidly expanding field of immunization research.
Experts broadly supported the Vaccine and
Immunization Research Cycle and its four overarching domains—vaccine
development, vaccine delivery, dissemination, and implementation and
evaluation. They recognized the value of mapping seventeen research avenues
across the full lifecycle of immunization research, from clinical development
and regulatory science to surveillance systems, behavioural drivers,
affordability, access, and uptake. Several participants noted that the
framework provides a useful “big picture” view of the research ecosystem, which
can help reduce fragmentation, clarify overlaps, and identify neglected
domains.
A major focus of the consultation was the
positioning of implementation research. Initially conceptualized as a separate
component, implementation research was later embedded across domains in
recognition of its cross-cutting nature. Experts endorsed this shift,
emphasizing that implementation research is integral to every stage—from
clinical trials and regulatory processes to delivery models, community
engagement, data use, and policy adaptation. Participants agreed that
explicitly highlighting implementation relevance across domains would
strengthen the taxonomy’s operational applicability, particularly for low- and
middle-income countries.
Several research areas are expected to overlap
across domains and research avenues, reflecting the interconnected and
multidisciplinary nature of immunization research. The discussion also
addressed the challenge of balancing conceptual clarity with real-world
complexity. Experts acknowledged that overlap between domains is inevitable
and, in some cases, desirable. Given the dynamic interactions between
development, delivery, behavioural drivers, policy, and systems strengthening,
strict compartmentalization may not reflect the true knowledge gaps.
There was also discussion on the title of the
report. Some suggested that the term “taxonomy” might imply rigid
categorization, whereas the framework functions more as a dynamic and
interconnected system. Alternative terminology—such as “framework,” “schema,”
or “landscape”—was proposed to better reflect its intended purpose as a
flexible decision-support tool.
Several recommendations were made to enhance the
framework’s responsiveness to emerging priorities. Participants called for
clearer integration of pandemic preparedness and outbreak response, including one
health approach and regulatory agility, emergency deployment strategies, and
surge manufacturing. Greater emphasis on life-course immunization, maternal
immunization, equity, vulnerable populations, primary health care integration,
elimination strategies, and antimicrobial resistance linkages was also recommended.
The report will be revised to incorporate these important considerations and
strengthen alignment with evolving global immunization priorities.
Importantly, the consultation emphasized that the
taxonomy’s success will depend on how it is used. Participants underscored its
potential to guide donor investments, inform national research
priority-setting, align funding calls with programmatic needs, and support gap
mapping across the research continuum. The idea of developing an interactive
digital tool or dashboard to operationalize the taxonomy—allowing tagging of
projects, visualization of investment patterns, and identification of
underfunded domains—was positively received.
Overall, the consultation reaffirmed strong
support for the Immunization Research Taxonomy as a strategic instrument to
enhance coordination, strengthen implementation-focused research, and align
evidence generation with immunization programme needs. The inputs received will
be incorporated to refine the structure further and enhance its clarity,
inclusiveness, and real-world utility.