Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32762991›Full record

ArticleValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2020

Comparative Distributional Impact of Routine Immunization and Supplementary Immunization Activities in Delivery of Measles Vaccine in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Allison Portnoy, Mark Jit, Stéphane Helleringer, Stéphane Verguet

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Allison PortnoyCenter for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Mark JitDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, England, UK; Modelling and Economics Unit, Public Health England, London, England, UK.
Stéphane HelleringerDepartment of Population Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Stéphane VerguetDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: verguet@hsph.harvard.edu.
Harvard Global Health Institute · USJohns Hopkins University · USLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

Impact of supplemental immunization activity campaigns on health systemsR03HD082443 · NICHD · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI VERGUET, STEPHANE · 2015 to 2016
$161k
NICHD NIH HHS R03 HD082443
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn many countries, measles disproportionately affects poorer households. To achieve equitable delivery, national immunization programs can use 2 main delivery platforms: routine immunization and supplementary immunization activities (SIAs). The objective of this article is to use data concerning measles vaccination coverage delivered via routine and SIA strategies to make inferences about the associated equity impact.

methodsWe relied on Demographic and Health Survey and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys multi-country survey data to conduct a comparative analysis of routine and SIA measles vaccination status of children by wealth quintile. We estimated the value of the angle, θ, for the ratio of the difference between coverage levels of adjacent wealth quintiles by using the arc-tangent formula. For each country/year observation, we averaged the θ estimates into one summary measurement, defined as the "equity impact number."

resultsAcross 20 countries, the equity impact number summarized across wealth quintiles was greater (and hence less equitable) for routine delivery than for SIAs in the survey rounds (years) during, before, and after an SIA about 65% of the time. The equity impact numbers for routine measles vaccination averaged across wealth quintiles were usually greater than for SIA measles vaccination across country-year observations.

conclusionsThis analysis examined how different measles vaccine delivery platforms can affect equity. It can serve to elucidate the impact of immunization and public health programs in terms of comparing horizontal to vertical delivery efforts and in reducing health inequalities in global and country-level decision-making.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesChildDeveloping CountriesHealth SurveysHumansImmunizationImmunization ProgramsMeaslesMeasles VaccineVaccination CoverageMeasles Vaccineequitylow- and middle-income countriesmeaslessupplementary immunization activitiesvaccination

Identifiers

PMID32762991
PMCPMC7519803
OpenAlexW3035381016

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.