Missed Opportune Children for Immunisation versus Immunisation Defaulters: Why Are They Indistinguishable?

The two major global immunisation agenda framings (Missed Opportunity for Immunisation, MOI vs Immunisation Defaulting) are interchangeably and inappropriately used in public health research and practice with flawed or misleading strategies recommended and adopted in various settings globally. This is evident in the fact that many opportunities to adopt evidence/findings from immunisation coverage research in policy are grossly missed. Ineffectiveness of inappropriate interventions from biased evidence can discourage and mislead the governance to make radical decisions by discretion. This could be the reason for the inability of low-and middle-income countries to vaccinate 80% of their children and otherwise; this also poses a global health threat to capable nations. The current guideline and information on MOI and immunisation defaulting appear insufficient and a little clarification on it would assist forerunners in immunisation to achieve measurable progress in ensuring good coverage especially in low-and middle-income countries. Consequently, this paper is aimed at addressing this issue in immunisation practice with appropriate recommendations. Optimistically, this will stimulate further discussions, streamline differences, and gear global immunisation governance on the subject matter, to achieve the target coverage by 2030 in low-and middle-income countries.