ArticlePloS one2018
Oral cholera vaccine coverage during a preventive door-to-door mass vaccination campaign in Nampula, Mozambique.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Updated fine-scale location data for Blantyre district collected using a low-cost approach.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Challenges with achieving and maintaining oral cholera vaccine coverage: insights from serial cross-sectional representative surveys in a cholera-endemic community in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Cholera and diarrheal diseases in Cuamba District, Niassa Province, Mozambique: Systematic healthcare facility-based surveillance strengthening, characteristics of suspected cholera and diarrheal patients, and incidence of diarrheal diseases.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Descriptive analysis of adverse events following immunization with oral cholera vaccine in Lebanon.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Cholera and COVID-19 pandemic prevention in multiple hotspot districts of Uganda: vaccine coverage, adverse events following immunization and WASH conditions survey.BMC infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- A scoping review of facilitators and barriers influencing the implementation of surveillance and oral cholera vaccine interventions for cholera control in lower- and middle-income countries.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Oral cholera vaccine coverage evaluation survey: Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals and host community in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Controlled Human Infection Models To Accelerate Vaccine Development.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2022Review
- Article
- An innovative approach in monitoring oral cholera vaccination campaign: integration of a between-round survey.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Leapfrogging with technology: introduction of a monitoring platform to support a large-scale Ebola vaccination program in Rwanda.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- Licensed and Recommended Inactivated Oral CholeraVaccines: From Development to Innovative Deployment.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2021Review
- Influence of Community-Led Total Sanitation and Water Coverages in the Control of Cholera in Madarounfa, Niger (2018).Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Use of surveys to evaluate an integrated oral cholera vaccine campaign in response to a cholera outbreak in Hoima district, Uganda.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Oral cholera vaccination coverage after the first global stockpile deployment in Haiti, 2014.Vaccine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn addition to improving water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) measures and optimal case management, the introduction of Oral cholera vaccine (OCV) is a complementary strategy for cholera prevention and control for vulnerable population groups. In October 2016, the Mozambique Ministry of Health implemented a mass vaccination campaign using a two-dose regimen of the Shanchol™ OCV in six high-risk neighborhoods of Nampula city, in Northern Mozambique. Overall 193,403 people were targeted by the campaign, which used a door-to-door strategy. During campaign follow-up, a population survey was conducted to assess: (1) OCV coverage; (2) frequency of adverse events following immunization; (3) vaccine acceptability and (4) reasons for non-vaccination. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsIn the absence of a household listing and clear administrative neighborhood delimitations, we used geospatial technology to select households from satellite images and used the support of community leaders. One person per household was randomly selected for interview. In total, 636 individuals were enrolled in the survey. The overall vaccination coverage with at least one dose (including card and oral reporting) was 69.5% (95%CI: 51.2-88.2) and the two-dose coverage was 51.2% (95%CI: 37.9-64.3). The campaign was well accepted. Among the 185 non-vaccinated individuals, 83 (44.6%) did not take the vaccine because they were absent when the vaccination team visited their houses. Among the 451 vaccinated individuals, 47 (10%) reported minor and non-specific complaints, and 78 (17.3%) mentioned they did not receive any information before the campaign. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In spite of overall coverage being slightly lower than expected, the use of a mobile door-to-door strategy remains a viable option even in densely-populated urban settings. Our results suggest that campaigns can be successfully implemented and well accepted in Mozambique in non-emergency contexts in order to prevent cholera outbreaks. These findings are encouraging and complement the previous Mozambican experience related to OCV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.