All closed questions had an open-ended component offering the opportunity to list other possible responses which were not listed. Where appropriate, the results from the two questionnaires were combined for this paper. Although the data from the European questionnaire has been published [13], some of the specific data used in this paper to calculate global statistics were not published. Various terms were defined as follows: ex-officio members as representatives from governmental departments

who provide expertise to the committee, attend committee meetings, express the views of the department they represent but do not take part in the final decision-making process; liaison members as representatives from immunization related organizations who provide expertise to the committee but do not take part CP-673451 clinical trial in the final decision-making process. The global and the European questionnaires were distributed through the WHO regional offices to each country for completion by the immunization manager or someone knowledgeable in the immunization development processes of the country such as the national ITAG chairperson. Both questionnaires prepared in English were translated into appropriate languages for the WHO regions (including French, Portuguese,

Spanish and Russian). The NVP-BKM120 in vivo global questionnaire was distributed in March 2008 and the European questionnaire in April 2008 [13]. The questionnaires and follow up letters encouraging participation were distributed by electronic mail. The majority were returned by electronic mail however, there were also hand-written questionnaires returned by mail and fax. The frequency distribution of each variable was calculated and differences between groups were tested for statistical significance using a two-sided Chi-squared

test or two-sided Fisher’s exact test depending on the number of expected responses. Responses were analyzed by geographic region as defined by WHO [12] and by development status as defined by the United Nations [14]. Given that calculated rates could be adversely impacted by assuming a non-response to a question meant a negative, whatever where data was missing, the country was not included in the final rate calculations. Thus the denominators for each reported rate varied depending on the number of country responses. Through informal discussion, the authors developed a list of best practice indicators to identify well functioning national ITAGs based on their experience working in the topic area. As the characteristics and methods of functioning of the ITAG depend on the context of a country, this was taken into consideration when creating the list. The first indicator was that the national ITAG had created a formal terms of reference to ensure that the methods of functioning of the group had been formally agreed upon, consistent, and transparent.