Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28859101›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Stakeholder perceptions of communication about vaccination in two regions of Cameroon: A qualitative case study.

Heather Ames, Diangha Mabel Njang, Claire Glenton, Atle Fretheim, Jessica Kaufman, Sophie Hill, Afiong Oku, Julie Cliff, Yuri Cartier, Xavier Bosch-Capblanch and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

15 authors.

Heather AmesGlobal Health Unit, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8509-7160
Diangha Mabel NjangDepartment of Anthropology, University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé, Central Province, Cameroon.
Claire GlentonGlobal Health Unit, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Atle FretheimGlobal Health Unit, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Jessica KaufmanCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Sophie HillCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Afiong OkuUniversity of Calabar, Nigeria, Calabar Municipal, Cross River State, Nigeria.
Julie CliffFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, Mozambique.
Yuri CartierInternational Union for Health Promotion and Education, Cedex, France.
Xavier Bosch-CapblanchSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Gabriel RadaEvidence-based Healthcare Programme, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Artur Manuel MuloliwaDirecção Provincial de Saúde de Nampula, Departamento de Saúde, Nampula-Moçambique.
Angela Oyo-ItaUniversity of Calabar, Nigeria, Calabar Municipal, Cross River State, Nigeria.
Awah Paschal KumDepartment of Anthropology, University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé, Central Province, Cameroon.
Simon LewinGlobal Health Unit, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding stakeholders' (parents', communities' and health workers') perspectives of communication about childhood vaccination, including their preferences for its format, delivery and content, is an important step towards designing better communication strategies and ensuring more informed parents. Our objectives were to explore stakeholders' views, experiences and preferences for childhood vaccination communication in Cameroon.

methodsIn 2014, in the Central and North West Regions of Cameron, we gathered qualitative data for our case study using the following methods: semi structured interviews; observations and informal conversations during routine immunization clinics and three rounds of the National Polio Immunization Campaign; document analysis of reports and mass media communications about vaccination; and a survey of parents. We conducted a thematic analysis of the qualitative data to identify themes relating to views, experiences and perceptions of vaccination information and its delivery. Survey data were analysed using simple descriptive statistics.

resultsAll of the parents interviewed felt that vaccinating their child was important, and trusted the information provided by health workers. However, many parents wanted more information. Parents did not always feel that they could ask questions during vaccination appointments. All participants felt that health workers and vaccination clinics were important sources of information. Social mobilisation activities such as door-to-door visits and announcements during religious services were important and accepted ways of communicating information, especially during vaccination campaigns. Information communicated through mass media and text messages was also seen as important. In general, stakeholders believed that more consistent messaging about routine vaccination through community channels would be helpful to remind parents of the importance of routine vaccination during ongoing rounds of vaccination campaigns against polio.

conclusionsThis study confirms that parents regard information about childhood vaccination as important, but that health services need to be organized in ways that prioritize and facilitate communication, particularly about routine vaccination.

Indexed as

CameroonChildFemaleHealth CommunicationHealth PersonnelHumansMaleParentsPerceptionPoliomyelitisSurveys and QuestionnairesVaccination

Identifiers

PMID28859101
PMCPMC5578665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.