Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27692772›Full record

SynthesisVaccine2016

Assessing strategies for increasing urban routine immunization coverage of childhood vaccines in low and middle-income countries: A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature.

Kristin N Nelson, Aaron S Wallace, Samir V Sodha, Danni Daniels, Vance Dietz

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Vaccine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kristin N NelsonEmory University, 201 Dowman Drive, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States. Electronic address: knbratt@emory.edu.
Aaron S WallaceEmory University, 201 Dowman Drive, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States; Global Immunization Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-A04, Atlanta, GA 30329, United States.
Samir V SodhaGlobal Immunization Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-A04, Atlanta, GA 30329, United States.
Danni DanielsGlobal Immunization Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-A04, Atlanta, GA 30329, United States.
Vance DietzGlobal Immunization Division, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-A04, Atlanta, GA 30329, United States.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionImmunization programs in developing countries increasingly face challenges to ensure equitable delivery of services within cities where rapid urban growth can result in informal settlements, poor living conditions, and heterogeneous populations. A number of strategies have been utilized in developing countries to ensure high community demand and equitable availability of urban immunization services; however, a synthesis of the literature on these strategies has not previously been undertaken.

methodsWe reviewed articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals between 1990 and 2013 that assessed interventions for improving routine immunization coverage in urban areas in low- and middle-income countries. We categorized the intervention in each study into one of three groups: (1) interventions aiming to increase utilization of immunization services; (2) interventions aiming to improve availability of immunization services by healthcare providers, or (3) combined availability and utilization interventions. We summarized the main quantitative outcomes from each study and effective practices from each intervention category.

resultsFifteen studies were identified; 87% from the African, Eastern Mediterranean and Southeast Asian regions of the World Health Organization (WHO). Six studies were randomized controlled trials, eight were pre- and post-intervention evaluations, and one was a cross-sectional study. Four described interventions designed to improve availability of routine immunization services, six studies described interventions that aimed to increase utilization, and five studies aiming to improve both availability and utilization of services. All studies reported positive change in their primary outcome indicator, although seven different primary outcomes indicators were used across studies. Studies varied considerably with respect to the type of intervention assessed, study design, and length of intervention assessment.

conclusionFew studies have assessed interventions designed explicitly for the unique challenges facing immunization programs in urban areas. Further research on sustainability, scalability, and cost-effectiveness of interventions is needed to fill this gap.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesImmunization ProgramsVaccination CoverageAfricaAsia, SoutheasternChildCitiesClinical Trials as TopicCross-Sectional StudiesHealth EducationHealth PersonnelHumansIncomePoverty AreasVaccinesVaccinesImmunizationSlumUrbanVaccination

Identifiers

PMID27692772
PMCPMC5309783

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.