Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33303438›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Use of surveys to evaluate an integrated oral cholera vaccine campaign in response to a cholera outbreak in Hoima district, Uganda.

Godfrey Bwire, Mellisa Roskosky, Anne Ballard, W Abdullah Brooks, Alfred Okello, Florentina Rafael, Immaculate Ampeire, Christopher Garimoi Orach, David A Sack

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Contrasting Epidemiology of Cholera in Bangladesh and Africa.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2021
    Review
  10. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Godfrey BwireDepartment of Community Health, Ministry of Health, Kampala, Uganda.
Mellisa RoskoskyDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Anne BallardDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
W Abdullah BrooksDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Alfred OkelloMakerere University, College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Florentina RafaelDepartment of Infectious Hazard Management, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Immaculate AmpeireMinistry of Health, Uganda National Expanded Program on Immunization, Kampala, Uganda.
Christopher Garimoi OrachMakerere University, College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
David A SackDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA dsack1@jhu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9338-5119
Johns Hopkins University · USMakerere University · UGMinistry of Health · UGWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

Epidemiology and Ecology of Cholera in AfricaR01AI123422 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Amanda Kay Debes, DAVID A SACK · 2017 to 2026
$6.6M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI123422World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the quality and coverage of the campaign to distribute oral cholera vaccine (OCV) during a cholera outbreak in Hoima, Uganda to guide future campaigns of cholera vaccine.

designSurvey of communities targeted for vaccination to determine vaccine coverage rates and perceptions of the vaccination campaign, and a separate survey of vaccine staff who carried out the campaign.

settingHoima district, Uganda.

participantsRepresentative clusters of households residing in the communities targeted for vaccination and staff members who conducted the vaccine campaign.

resultsAmong 209 households (1274 individuals) included in the coverage survey, 1193 (94%; 95% CI 92% to 95%) reported receiving at least one OCV dose and 998 (78%; 95% CI 76% to 81%) reported receiving two doses. Among vaccinated individuals, minor complaints were reported by 71 persons (5.6%). Individuals with 'some' education (primary school or above) were more knowledgeable regarding the required OCV doses compared with non-educated (p=0.03). Factors negatively associated with campaign implementation included community sensitisation time, staff payment and problems with field transport. Although the campaign was carried out quickly, the outbreak was over before the campaign started. Most staff involved in the campaign (93%) were knowledgeable about cholera control; however, 29% did not clearly understand how to detect and manage adverse events following immunisation.

conclusionThe campaign achieved high OCV coverage, but the surveys provided insights for improvement. To achieve high vaccine coverage, more effort is needed for community sensitisation, and additional resources for staff transportation and timely payment for campaign staff is required. Pretest and post-test assessment of staff training can identify and address knowledge and skill gaps.

Indexed as

CholeraCholera VaccinesAdministration, OralDisease OutbreaksHumansUgandaCholera Vaccinesepidemiologygastrointestinal infectionsinfection controlinternational health servicespublic healthtropical medicine

Identifiers

PMID33303438
PMCPMC7733212
OpenAlexW3112149835

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.