Trial reportVaccine2019
Home-based records and vaccination appointment stickers as parental reminders to reduce vaccination dropout in Indonesia: A cluster-randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Vaccine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of Catch-Up Vaccination Interventions Versus Standard or Usual Care Procedures in Increasing Adherence to Recommended Vaccinations Among Different Age Groups: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Before-After Studies.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Pooled it
- Interventions for improving coverage of childhood immunisation in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Immunization Coverage and Associated Factors Among Children Aged 18 to 72 Months in Communities With High Malaria Transmission, Bioko Island.International journal of public health · 2026Article
- Inequalities in ownership and availability of home-based vaccination records in 82 low- and middle-income countries.BMJ global health · 2024Article
- Analyzing the usage of theories of change for routine immunization programs -- a review of impact evaluations from LMICs.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2024Review
- Interventions addressing routine childhood immunization and its behavioral and social drivers.Frontiers in public health · 2024Review
- Article
- Barriers to and Facilitators of Hepatitis B Vaccination among the Adult Population in Indonesia: A Mixed Methods Study.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Parental Reminder Strategies and the Cost Implication for Improved Immunisation Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Timeliness of routine childhood vaccination in 103 low-and middle-income countries, 1978-2021: A scoping review to map measurement and methodological gaps.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLimited evidence is available about the effectiveness of strategies to remind caregivers when to bring children back for future vaccinations in low- and middle-income country settings. We evaluated the effectiveness of two reminder strategies based on home-based vaccination records (HBR) in Indonesia.
methodsIn this cluster-randomized controlled trial involving 3616 children <1 year of age, 90 health facilities were randomly assigned to either a control group or one of two intervention groups: (1) HBR-only group, where healthcare workers provided an HBR to any child without an HBR during a vaccination visit and instructed the caregiver to keep it at home between visits, or (2) HBR + sticker group, where, in addition to HBR provision, healthcare workers placed vaccination appointment reminder stickers on the HBR. The primary outcome was receipt of the third dose of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis-containing vaccine (DTPcv3) within 7 months and the secondary outcome was receipt of a timely DTPcv3 dose.
resultsControl group DTPcv3 coverage was 81%. In intention-to-treat analysis, neither intervention group had significantly different DTPcv3 coverage compared with the control group (RR = 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87; 1.02 for HBR-only group; RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.90; 1.04 for HBR + sticker group) by study end. However, children in the HBR + sticker group were 50% more likely to have received a DTPcv3 vaccination (RR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.02, 2.09) within 60 days of DTPcv1 vaccination, compared with children in the control group; children in the HBR-only group were not more likely to have done so (RR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.71, 1.55). DISCUSSION: Reminder stickers had an immediate effect on coverage by improving the proportion of children who received a timely DTPcv3 dose but no effect on the proportion who received DTPcv3 after 7 months. Coupling reminder stickers with strategies to address other reasons why children do not return for vaccination visits should be further explored.
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.