Informing social media analysis for public health: a cross-sectional survey of professionals.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the field of infodemic management has grown in response to urgent global need. Social listening is the first step in managing the infodemic, and many organizations and health systems have implemented processes. Social media analysis tools have traditionally been developed for commercial purposes, rather than public health, and little is known of the experiences and needs of those professionals using them for infodemic management. METHODS: We developed a cross sectional survey and distributed through global infodemic management networks between December 2022 and February 2023. Questions were structured over four sections related to work-practice and user needs and did not collect any personal details from participants. Descriptive analysis was conducted on the study results. Qualitative analysis was used to categorise and understand answers to open-text questions. RESULTS: There were 417 participants, 162/417 who completed all survey questions, and 255/417 who completed some, all responses are included in analysis. Respondents came from all global regions and a variety of workplaces. Participants had an average of 4.4 years' experience in the analysis of social media for public health. COVID-19 was the most common health issue people had conducted social media analysis for. Results reveal a range of training, technical capacity, and support needs. CONCLUSIONS: This paper is the first we are aware of to seek and describe the needs of those using social media analysis platforms for public health purposes since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are key areas for future work and research, including addressing the training, capacity building and leadership needs of those working in this space, and the need to facilitate easier access to better platforms for performing social media analysis.

Establishing Infodemic Management in Germany: A Framework for Social Listening and Integrated Analysis to Report Infodemic Insights at the National Public Health Institute.

BACKGROUND: To respond to the need to establish infodemic management functions at the national public health institute in Germany (Robert Koch Institute, RKI), we explored and assessed available data sources, developed a social listening and integrated analysis framework, and defined when infodemic management functions should be activated during emergencies. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to establish a framework for social listening and integrated analysis for public health in the German context using international examples and technical guidance documents for infodemic management. METHODS: This study completed the following objectives: identified (potentially) available data sources for social listening and integrated analysis; assessed these data sources for their suitability and usefulness for integrated analysis in addition to an assessment of their risk using the RKI's standardized data protection requirements; developed a framework and workflow to combine social listening and integrated analysis to report back actionable infodemic insights for public health communications by the RKI and stakeholders; and defined criteria for activating integrated analysis structures in the context of a specific health event or health emergency. RESULTS: We included and classified 38% (16/42) of the identified and assessed data sources for social listening and integrated analysis at the RKI into 3 categories: social media and web-based listening data, RKI-specific data, and infodemic insights. Most data sources can be analyzed weekly to detect current trends and narratives and to inform a timely response by reporting insights that include a risk assessment and scalar judgments of different narratives and themes. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified, assessed, and prioritized a wide range of data sources for social listening and integrated analysis to report actionable infodemic insights, ensuring a valuable first step in establishing and operationalizing infodemic management at the RKI. This case study also serves as a roadmap for others. Ultimately, once operational, these activities will inform better and targeted public health communication at the RKI and beyond.

Social Media Analysis Tools for Public Health: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

During the COVID-19 pandemic the field of infodemic management has grown significantly. Social listening is the first step in managing the infodemic but little is known of the experience of public health professionals using social media analysis tools for health. Our survey sought the views of infodemic managers. Participants (n=417) had an average of 4.4 years' experience in social media analysis for health. Results reveal gaps in technical capabilities of tools, data sources, and languages covered. For future planning for infodemic preparednessand preventi on it is vital to understand and deliver for analysis needs of those working in the field.

Measuring the Burden of Infodemics: Summary of the Methods and Results of the Fifth WHO Infodemic Management Conference.

Background: An infodemic is excess information, including false or misleading information, that spreads in digital and physical environments during a public health emergency. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an unprecedented global infodemic that has led to confusion about the benefits of medical and public health interventions, with substantial impact on risk-taking and health-seeking behaviors, eroding trust in health authorities and compromising the effectiveness of public health responses and policies. Standardized measures are needed to quantify the harmful impacts of the infodemic in a systematic and methodologically robust manner, as well as harmonizing highly divergent approaches currently explored for this purpose. This can serve as a foundation for a systematic, evidence-based approach to monitoring, identifying, and mitigating future infodemic harms in emergency preparedness and prevention. Objective: In this paper, we summarize the Fifth World Health Organization (WHO) Infodemic Management Conference structure, proceedings, outcomes, and proposed actions seeking to identify the interdisciplinary approaches and frameworks needed to enable the measurement of the burden of infodemics. Methods: An iterative human-centered design (HCD) approach and concept mapping were used to facilitate focused discussions and allow for the generation of actionable outcomes and recommendations. The discussions included 86 participants representing diverse scientific disciplines and health authorities from 28 countries across all WHO regions, along with observers from civil society and global public health-implementing partners. A thematic map capturing the concepts matching the key contributing factors to the public health burden of infodemics was used throughout the conference to frame and contextualize discussions. Five key areas for immediate action were identified. Results: The 5 key areas for the development of metrics to assess the burden of infodemics and associated interventions included (1) developing standardized definitions and ensuring the adoption thereof; (2) improving the map of concepts influencing the burden of infodemics; (3) conducting a review of evidence, tools, and data sources; (4) setting up a technical working group; and (5) addressing immediate priorities for postpandemic recovery and resilience building. The summary report consolidated group input toward a common vocabulary with standardized terms, concepts, study designs, measures, and tools to estimate the burden of infodemics and the effectiveness of infodemic management interventions. Conclusions: Standardizing measurement is the basis for documenting the burden of infodemics on health systems and population health during emergencies. Investment is needed into the development of practical, affordable, evidence-based, and systematic methods that are legally and ethically balanced for monitoring infodemics; generating diagnostics, infodemic insights, and recommendations; and developing interventions, action-oriented guidance, policies, support options, mechanisms, and tools for infodemic managers and emergency program managers.

Behavioral and Social Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States, August-November 2021.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and widely available, but many adults in the U.S. have not been vaccinated for COVID-19. This study examined the associations between behavioral and social drivers of vaccination with COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the U.S. adults and their prevalence by region. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of U.S. adults participated in a cross-sectional telephone survey in August-November 2021; the analysis was conducted in January 2022. Survey questions assessed self-reported COVID-19 vaccine initiation, demographics, and behavioral and social drivers of vaccination. RESULTS: Among the 255,763 respondents, 76% received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccine uptake was higher among respondents aged ≥75 years (94%), females (78%), and Asian non-Hispanic people (94%). The drivers of vaccination most strongly associated with uptake included higher anticipated regret from nonvaccination, risk perception, and confidence in vaccine safety and importance, followed by work- or school-related vaccination requirements, social norms, and provider recommendation (all p<0.05). The direction of association with uptake varied by reported level of difficulty in accessing vaccines. The prevalence of all of these behavioral and social drivers of vaccination was highest in the Northeast region and lowest in the Midwest and South. CONCLUSIONS: This nationally representative survey found that COVID-19 vaccine uptake was most strongly associated with greater anticipated regret, risk perception, and confidence in vaccine safety and importance, followed by vaccination requirements and social norms. Interventions that leverage these social and behavioral drivers of vaccination have the potential to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and could be considered for other vaccine introductions.

A qualitative study of behavioral and social drivers of COVID-19 vaccine confidence and uptake among unvaccinated Americans in the US April-May 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Around one-third of Americans reported they were unwilling to get a COVID-19 vaccine in April 2021. This focus group study aimed to provide insights on the factors contributing to unvaccinated adults' hesitancy or refusal to get vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines. METHOD: Ipsos recruited 59 unvaccinated US adults who were vaccine hesitant (i.e., conflicted about or opposed to receiving a COVID-19 vaccination) using the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Trained facilitators led a total of 10 focus groups via video-conference in March and April 2021. Two coders manually coded the data from each group using a coding frame based on the focus group discussion guide. The coding team collaborated in analyzing the data for key themes. RESULTS: Data analysis of transcripts from the focus groups illuminated four main themes associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: lack of trust in experts and institutions; concern about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines; resistance towards prescriptive guidance and restrictions; and, despite personal reluctance or unwillingness to get vaccinated, acceptance of others getting vaccinated. DISCUSSION: Vaccine confidence communication strategies should address individual concerns, describe the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination, and highlight evolving science using factural and neutral presentations of information to foster trust.

The Future of Infodemic Surveillance as Public Health Surveillance.

Public health systems need to be able to detect and respond to infodemics (outbreaks of misinformation, disinformation, information overload, or information voids). Drawing from our experience at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the COVID-19 State of Vaccine Confidence Insight Reporting System has been created as one of the first public health infodemic surveillance systems. Key functions of infodemic surveillance systems include monitoring the information environment by person, place, and time; identifying infodemic events with digital analytics; conducting offline community-based assessments; and generating timely routine reports. Although specific considerations of several system attributes of infodemic surveillance system must be considered, infodemic surveillance systems share several similarities with traditional public health surveillance systems. Because both information and pathogens are spread more readily in an increasingly hyperconnected world, sustainable and routine systems must be created to ensure that timely interventions can be deployed for both epidemic and infodemic response.

Employer requirements and COVID-19 vaccination and attitudes among healthcare personnel in the U.S.: Findings from National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module, August - September 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Employer vaccination requirements have been used to increase vaccination uptake among healthcare personnel (HCP). In summer 2021, HCP were the group most likely to have employer requirements for COVID-19 vaccinations as healthcare facilities led the implementation of such requirements. This study examined the association between employer requirements and HCP's COVID-19 vaccination status and attitudes about the vaccine. METHODS: Participants were a national representative sample of United States (US) adults who completed the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) during August-September 2021. Respondents were asked about COVID-19 vaccination and intent, requirements for vaccination, place of work, attitudes surrounding vaccinations, and sociodemographic variables. This analysis focused on HCP respondents. We first calculated the weighted proportion reporting COVID-19 vaccination for HCP by sociodemographic variables. Then we computed unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios for vaccination coverage and key indicators on vaccine attitudes, comparing HCP based on individual self-report of vaccination requirements. RESULTS: Of 12,875 HCP respondents, 41.5% reported COVID-19 vaccination employer requirements. Among HCP with vaccination requirements, 90.5% had been vaccinated against COVID-19, as compared to 73.3% of HCP without vaccination requirements-a pattern consistent across sociodemographic groups. Notably, the greatest differences in uptake between HCP with and without employee requirements were seen in sociodemographic subgroups with the lowest vaccination uptake, e.g., HCP aged 18-29 years, HCP with high school or less education, HCP living below poverty, and uninsured HCP. In every sociodemographic subgroup examined, vaccine uptake was more equitable among HCP with vaccination requirements than in HCP without. Finally, HCP with vaccination requirements were also more likely to express confidence in the vaccine's safety (68.3% vs. 60.1%) and importance (89.6% vs 79.6%). CONCLUSION: In a large national US sample, employer requirements were associated with higher and more equitable HCP vaccination uptake across all sociodemographic groups examined. Our findings suggest that employer requirements can contribute to improving COVID-19 vaccination coverage, similar to patterns seen for other vaccines.

COVID-19 vaccination coverage and intent among women aged 18-49 years by pregnancy status, United States, April-November 2021.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant and postpartum women are at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19. We assessed COVID-19 vaccination coverage, intent, and attitudes among women of reproductive age overall and by pregnancy status in the United States. METHODS: Data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module collected during April 22-November 27, 2021, were analyzed to assess COVID-19 vaccination (receipt of ≥1 dose), intent for vaccination, and attitudes towards vaccination among women aged 18-49 years overall and by pregnancy status (trying to get pregnant, currently pregnant, breastfeeding, and not trying to get pregnant or currently pregnant or breastfeeding). Logistic regression and predictive marginals were used to generate unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs and aPRs). Trend analyses were conducted to assess monthly changes in vaccination and intent. RESULTS: Our analyses included 110,925 women aged 18-49 years. COVID-19 vaccination coverage (≥1 dose) was 63.2% overall (range from 53.3% in HHS Region 4 to 76.5% in HHS Region 1). Vaccination coverage was lowest among pregnant women (45.1%), followed by women who were trying to get pregnant (49.5%), women who were breastfeeding (51.5%), and all other women (64.9%). Non-Hispanic (NH) Black women who were pregnant or breastfeeding had significantly lower vaccination coverage (aPR: 0.74 and 0.66, respectively) than NH White women. DISCUSSION: Our findings are consistent with other studies showing lower vaccination coverage among pregnant individuals, with substantially lower vaccination coverage among NH Black women who are pregnant or breastfeeding. Given the overlapping and disproportionate risks of COVID-19 and maternal mortality among Black women, it is critical that COVID-19 vaccination be strongly recommended for these populations and all women of reproductive age. Healthcare and public health providers may take advantage of every opportunity to encourage vaccination and enlist the assistance of community leaders, particularly in communities with low vaccination coverage.

WHO competency framework for health authorities and institutions to manage infodemics: its development and features.

BACKGROUND: In April 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) Information Network for Epidemics produced an agenda for managing the COVID-19 infodemic. "Infodemic" refers to the overabundance of information-including mis- and disinformation. In this agenda it was pointed out the need to create a competency framework for infodemic management (IM). This framework was released by WHO on 20th September 2021. This paper presents the WHO framework for IM by highlighting the different investigative steps behind its development. METHODS: The framework was built through three steps. Step 1 included the preparatory work following the guidelines in the Guide to writing Competency Framework for WHO Academy courses. Step 2 was based on a qualitative study with participants (N = 25), identified worldwide on the basis of their academic background in relevant fields of IM or of their professional experience in IM activities at the institutional level. The interviews were conducted online between December 2020 and January 2021, they were video-recorded and analyzed using thematic analysis. In Step 3, two stakeholder panels were conducted to revise the framework. RESULTS: The competency framework contains four primary domains, each of which comprised main activities, related tasks, and knowledge and skills. It identifies competencies to manage and monitor infodemics, to design, conduct and evaluate appropriate interventions, as well as to strengthen health systems. Its main purpose is to assist institutions in reinforcing their IM capacities and implementing effective IM processes and actions according to their individual contexts and resources. CONCLUSION: The competency framework is not intended to be a regulatory document nor a training curriculum. As a WHO initiative, it serves as a reference tool to be applied according to local priorities and needs within the different countries. This framework can assist institutions in strengthening IM capacity by hiring, staff development, and human resources planning.

COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage and Vaccine Confidence by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity - United States, August 29-October 30, 2021.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) populations have higher prevalences of health conditions associated with severe COVID-19 illness compared with non-LGBT populations (1). The potential for low vaccine confidence and coverage among LGBT populations is of concern because these persons historically experience challenges accessing, trusting, and receiving health care services (2). Data on COVID-19 vaccination among LGBT persons are limited, in part because of the lack of routine data collection on sexual orientation and gender identity at the national and state levels. During August 29-October 30, 2021, data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) were analyzed to assess COVID-19 vaccination coverage and confidence in COVID-19 vaccines among LGBT adults aged ≥18 years. By sexual orientation, gay or lesbian adults reported higher vaccination coverage overall (85.4%) than did heterosexual adults (76.3%). By race/ethnicity, adult gay or lesbian non-Hispanic White men (94.1%) and women (88.5%), and Hispanic men (82.5%) reported higher vaccination coverage than that reported by non-Hispanic White heterosexual men (74.2%) and women (78. 6%). Among non-Hispanic Black adults, vaccination coverage was lower among gay or lesbian women (57.9%) and bisexual women (62.1%) than among heterosexual women (75.6%). Vaccination coverage was lowest among non-Hispanic Black LGBT persons across all categories of sexual orientation and gender identity. Among gay or lesbian adults and bisexual adults, vaccination coverage was lower among women (80.5% and 74.2%, respectively) than among men (88.9% and 81.7%, respectively). By gender identity, similar percentages of adults who identified as transgender or nonbinary and those who did not identify as transgender or nonbinary were vaccinated. Gay or lesbian adults and bisexual adults were more confident than were heterosexual adults in COVID-19 vaccine safety and protection; transgender or nonbinary adults were more confident in COVID-19 vaccine protection, but not safety, than were adults who did not identify as transgender or nonbinary. To prevent serious illness and death, it is important that all persons in the United States, including those in the LGBT community, stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations.

COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage and Intent Among Adults Aged 18-39 Years - United States, March-May 2021.

Since April 19, 2021, all persons aged ≥16 years in the United States have been eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. As of May 30, 2021, approximately one half of U.S. adults were fully vaccinated, with the lowest coverage and lowest reported intent to get vaccinated among young adults aged 18-39 years (1-4). To examine attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and vaccination intent among adults in this age group, CDC conducted nationally representative household panel surveys during March-May 2021. Among respondents aged 18-39 years, 34.0% reported having received a COVID-19 vaccine. A total of 51.8% were already vaccinated or definitely planned to get vaccinated, 23.2% reported that they probably were going to get vaccinated or were unsure about getting vaccinated, and 24.9% reported that they probably or definitely would not get vaccinated. Adults aged 18-24 years were least likely to report having received a COVID-19 vaccine and were most likely to report being unsure about getting vaccinated or that they were probably going to get vaccinated. Adults aged 18-39 years with lower incomes, with lower educational attainment, without health insurance, who were non-Hispanic Black, and who lived outside of metropolitan areas had the lowest reported vaccination coverage and intent to get vaccinated. Concerns about vaccine safety and effectiveness were the primary reported reasons for not getting vaccinated. Vaccination intent and acceptance among adults aged 18-39 years might be increased by improving confidence in vaccine safety and efficacy while emphasizing that vaccines are critical to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to friends and family and for resuming social activities (5).

Using immunisation caregiver journey interviews to understand and optimise vaccination uptake: lessons from Sierra Leone.

Quantitative and qualitative assessments have revealed diverse factors that influence the uptake of childhood immunisation services and shed light on reasons for vaccination delays and refusals. UNICEF and partner organisations developed the Immunisation Caregiver Journey Framework as a novel way to understand caregiver experiences in accessing and receiving immunisation services for children. This framework aims to help immunisation programmes identify vaccination barriers and opportunities to improve vaccination uptake by enhancing the overall caregiver journey in a systems-focused manner, using human-centred design principles. In this paper, we adapt the framework into a flexible qualitative inquiry approach with theoretical guidance from interpretative phenomenology. We draw from the implementation experiences in Sierra Leone to inform methodological guidance on how to design and implement the Immunisation Caregiver Journey Interviews (ICJI) to understand the lived experiences of caregivers as they navigate immunisation services for their children. Practical guidance is provided on sampling techniques, conducting interviews, data management, data analysis and the use of data to inform programmatic actions. When properly implemented, the ICJI approach generates a rich qualitative understanding of how caregivers navigate household and community dynamics, as well as primary healthcare delivery systems. We argue that understanding and improving the caregiver journey will enhance essential immunisation outcomes, such as the completion of the recommended vaccination schedule, timeliness of vaccination visits and reduction in dropouts between vaccine doses.

Decision Making and Implementation of the First Public Sector Introduction of Typhoid Conjugate Vaccine-Navi Mumbai, India, 2018.

BACKGROUND: Typhoid fever prevention and control efforts are critical in an era of rising antimicrobial resistance among typhoid pathogens. India remains one of the highest typhoid disease burden countries, although a highly efficacious typhoid conjugate vaccine (TCV), prequalified by the World Health Organization in 2017, has been available since 2013. In 2018, the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) introduced TCV into its immunization program, targeting children aged 9 months to 14 years in 11 of 22 areas (Phase 1 campaign). We describe the decision making, implementation, and delivery costing to inform TCV use in other settings. METHODS: We collected information on the decision making and campaign implementation in addition to administrative coverage from NMMC and partners. We then used a microcosting approach from the local government (NMMC) perspective, using a new Microsoft Excel-based tool to estimate the financial and economic vaccination campaign costs. RESULTS: The planning and implementation of the campaign were led by NMMC with support from multiple partners. A fixed-post campaign was conducted during weekends and public holidays in July-August 2018 which achieved an administrative vaccination coverage of 71% (ranging from 46% in high-income to 92% in low-income areas). Not including vaccine and vaccination supplies, the average financial cost and economic cost per dose of TCV delivery were $0.45 and $1.42, respectively. CONCLUSION: The first public sector TCV campaign was successfully implemented by NMMC, with high administrative coverage in slums and low-income areas. Delivery cost estimates provide important inputs to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and affordability of TCV vaccination through public sector preventive campaigns.

Retinal thinning and brain atrophy in early MS and CIS.

BACKGROUND: Optical coherence tomography (OCT) could be complementary to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain in monitoring course of multiple sclerosis (MS) and clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). Thinning of neurons in ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (GCIPL) measured by OCT is assumed to be associated with brain atrophy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate association of GCIPL with brain parameters detected by quantitative MRI (qMRI) and MR-spectroscopy (MRS) in early MS and CIS. METHODS: Seventeen newly diagnosed MS and 18 CIS patients were prospectively included. The patients were assessed at baseline as well as at 1 year follow-up by OCT, qMRI and MRS. Brain parenchymal and myelin volumes (BPV, MYV respectively) and the corresponding fractions (BPF, MYF) were measured with qMRI. Metabolites including myo-inositol (myo-Ins) were measured in the normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) using MRS. T-tests and ANOVA were used to analyze group differences, and linear regression models to evaluate association of GCIPL with BPV, MYV and myo-Ins after correlation analysis. RESULTS: Disease activity reflected by lesions on MRI and presence of CSF oligoclonal IgG bands were more prominent in MS compared to CIS. GCIPL, BPV, MYV, BPF and MYF were reduced, while concentration of myo-Ins was increased in MS compared to CIS. Follow-up showed consistency of thinner GCIPL in MS compared to CIS. GCIPL thinning correlated with reduced BPV and MYV (P < .05 for both), but with increased myo-Ins (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Significant GCIPL thinning occurs in early MS and is associated with enhanced brain inflammation and atrophy.

Gentle rocking movements during sleep in the elderly.

Vestibular stimulation in the form of rocking movements could be a promising non-pharmacological intervention for populations with reduced sleep quality, such as the elderly. We hypothesized that rocking movements influence sleep by promoting comfort. We assessed whether gentle rocking movements can facilitate the transition from wake to sleep, increase sleep spindle density and promote deep sleep in elderly people. We assessed self-reported comfort using a pilot protocol including translational movements and movements along a pendulum trajectory with peak linear accelerations between 0.10 and 0.20 m/s2 . We provided whole-night stimulation using the settings rated most comfortable during the pilot study (movements along a pendulum trajectory with peak linear acceleration of 0.15 m/s2 ). Sleep measures (polysomnography) of two baseline and two movement nights were compared. In our sample (n = 19; eight female; mean age: 66.7 years, standard deviation: 3 years), vestibular stimulation using preferred stimulation settings did not improve sleep. A reduction of delta power was observed, suggesting reduced sleep depth during rocking movements. Sleep fragmentation was similar in both conditions. We did not observe a sleep-promoting effect using settings optimized to be comfortable. This finding could imply that comfort is not the underlying mechanism. At frequencies below 0.3 Hz, the otoliths cannot distinguish tilt from translation. Translational movement trajectories, such as used in previous studies reporting positive effects of rocking, could have caused sensory confusion due to a mismatch between vestibular and other sensory information. We propose that this sensory confusion might be essential to the sleep-promoting effect of rocking movements described in other studies.

Lessons on causality assessment and communications from the 2019 South-East Asia Regional (SEAR) workshop on inter-country expert review of selected Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) cases.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance of AEFI is fundamental for improving safety and maintaining public support for vaccination. In SEAR, billions of doses of vaccine are given annually. The objective of the 2019 SEAR AEFI training workshop was to further strengthen in-country vaccine safety, assess capacity compared to 2014 and to better integrate communication into the AEFI causality assessment program. METHODS: A 3 ½ day workshop with AEFI experts from all 11 SEAR countries. Participants outlined each county's AEFI data, critiqued their AEFI program, reviewed and critiqued causality assessment of 23 anonymized serious AEFI cases and proposed communication plans for each. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2018, over 2.9 billion doses of vaccine were given in SEAR. Compared to 2014, AEFI detection and causality assessment skills had improved. AEFI experts' communication planning skills markedly improved during the workshop. Good concordance was found between country causality assessment findings and the workshop critiques. A list of targeted recommendations (country, regional and global levels) arose from the workshop. CONCLUSIONS: SEAR countries have much improved their AEFI detection and causality assessment expertise since 2014. Given the high volume of doses administered and the AEFI technical expertise, SEAR countries can well monitor safety of regionally produced vaccines. Integration of AEFI communication into AEFI causality assessment can help mitigate potential negative impacts of serious AEFIs.