AMA, Vaccine Integrity Project unveil independent vaccine evidence review

MINNEAPOLIS, Minn. - The Vaccine Integrity Project, in collaboration with the American Medical Association (AMA), today announced the completion of an independent, vaccine evidence review that assessed the safety and effectiveness of immunizations against influenza, SARS CoV-2 and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

The latest high-quality scientific evidence found that these immunizations continue to provide meaningful protection against severe illness, hospitalization and death. Led by the Vaccine Integrity Project, the review also examined new safety data collected since summer 2025 and identified no new safety concerns in comparative studies with currently recommended immunizations.

Based on the most recent peer-reviewed data, the review gives the public the information they need to help inform their vaccination decisions about the three leading causes of serious respiratory virus-related Illness.

JAMA published the evidence reviews for RSV, influenza and SARS CoV-2 today. An interactive tool on the Vaccine Integrity Project website lets clinicians, researchers and the public search the studies evaluated by virus or by population group, with links to each paper.

The evidence review helped inform the 2026-27 respiratory virus immunization recommendations released today by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA).

"Immunization continues to be one of our best tools for preventing severe illness from respiratory viruses," Vaccine Integrity Project Executive Director Michael T. Osterholm, PhD, MPH, said. "This year's review confirms that the newest evidence remains consistent with research showing these immunizations reduce the risk of hospitalization and death among the people most likely to experience serious disease."

The AMA and the Vaccine Integrity Project collaborated on the 2026-2027 respiratory virus season evidence review process. The organizations worked with medical specialty societies and public health organizations to identify key policy questions, evaluate emerging evidence to inform immunization recommendations, and to communicate findings to clinicians and patients.

The AMA also launched a digital resource hub with immunization materials for clinicians and patients based on the evidence review and the medical societies' recommendations. The resources reflect an AMA needs assessment of physicians, patients and parents of caregivers, public health professionals, and payers, which identified the tools needed to put this season's vaccine recommendations to practice. These resources, along with the immunization evidence reviews and recommendations, can be found at SpreadTheFacts.org.

"The American public deserves clear, credible information - based on the best available scientific evidence - when making decisions about vaccination. The latest evidence reviews and recommendations are the result of our shared commitment across clinical medicine, science and public health to ensure vaccine recommendations are grounded in sound evidence and developed through a transparent process," said AMA President-elect Sandra Adamson Fryhofer, MD. "We will continue to work together to make sure the public has evidence-based vaccine guidance to help them make informed decisions."

The Vaccine Integrity Project reviewed hundreds of peer-reviewed studies published since August 2025, building on its 2025-26 evidence review of vaccine effectiveness, safety and disease epidemiology data. Prior to 2025, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) routinely reviewed vaccine data to guide immunization recommendations. That process was disrupted last year when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services abruptly dismissed ACIP's members and appointed replacements. Despite a successful court challenge in March, an expert-led ACIP has yet to be restored.

Editor's Note: Summary of Vaccine Integrity Project's evidence reviews (PDF).