Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28978495›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2017

Using Mobile Phones to Improve Vaccination Uptake in 21 Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Systematic Review.

Clare Oliver-Williams, Elizabeth Brown, Sara Devereux, Cassandra Fairhead, Isaac Holeman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 9 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

Clare Oliver-WilliamsHomerton College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3573-2426
Elizabeth BrownGonville and Caius College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0384-739X
Sara DevereuxTrinity College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7512-1339
Cassandra FairheadUniversity College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5306-6965
Isaac HolemanJudge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9072-4162

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe benefits of vaccination have been comprehensively proven; however, disparities in coverage persist because of poor health system management, limited resources, and parental knowledge and attitudes. Evidence suggests that health interventions that engage local parties in communication strategies improve vaccination uptake. As mobile technology is widely used to improve health communication, mobile health (mHealth) interventions might be used to increase coverage.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the available literature on the use of mHealth to improve vaccination in low- and middle-income countries with large numbers of unvaccinated children.

methodsIn February 2017, MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Scopus, and Web of Science, as well as three health organization websites-Communication Initiative Network, TechNet-21, and PATH-were searched to identify mHealth intervention studies on vaccination uptake in 21 countries.

resultsTen peer-reviewed studies and 11 studies from white or gray literature were included. Nine took place in India, three in Pakistan, two each in Malawi and Nigeria, and one each in Bangladesh, Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Kenya. Ten peer-reviewed studies and 7 white or gray studies demonstrated improved vaccination uptake after interventions, including appointment reminders, mobile phone apps, and prerecorded messages.

conclusionsAlthough the potential for mHealth interventions to improve vaccination coverage seems clear, the evidence for such interventions is not. The dearth of studies in countries facing the greatest barriers to immunization impedes the prospects for evidence-based policy and practice in these settings.

Indexed as

cell phonescommunicationglobal healthmHealthtelemedicinevaccination

Identifiers

PMID28978495
PMCPMC5647459

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.