Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35240925›Full record

Trial reportHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2022

Public engagement during a typhoid conjugate vaccine trial in Lalitpur, Nepal- experience, challenges and lessons learnt.

Ashata Dahal, Mila Shakya, Dikshya Pant, Anup Adhikari, Rachel Colin-Jones, Katherine Theiss-Nyland, Andrew J Pollard, Buddha Basnyat, Shrijana Shrestha

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 60% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ashata DahalPatan Academy of Health Sciences, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit-Nepal, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Mila ShakyaPatan Academy of Health Sciences, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit-Nepal, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Dikshya PantDepartment of Paediatrics, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Anup AdhikariNepal Family Development Foundation, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Rachel Colin-JonesOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK.
Katherine Theiss-NylandOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK.
Andrew J PollardOxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK.
Buddha BasnyatPatan Academy of Health Sciences, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit-Nepal, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Shrijana ShresthaDepartment of Paediatrics, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Patan Academy of Health Sciences · NPOxford BioMedica (United Kingdom) · GBNepal Family Development Foundation · NP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Typhoid is a public health problem in Nepal. To generate evidence on the impact of Typhoid Conjugate Vaccine (TCV), a phase 3, double-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted in Lalitpur, Nepal. 20,000 children aged between 9 months and ≤16 years were vaccinated with a new TCV, or control vaccine. Participants were actively followed for safety and efficacy over 2 years through passive surveillance (PS) clinics. Several challenges were encountered during vaccination and PS stemming from misinformation, misconception, and fear around clinical trials in the community. Public engagement (PE) activities were conducted across various tiers moving from decision makers in the first tier; to elected local representatives in the second tier; ending with interaction in community with parents/guardians of the targeted population. Prior and during vaccination, engagement was conducted to inform about the study and discuss the importance of vaccination. Post-vaccination, engagement was conducted to inform about PS clinics, alleviate study concerns and share study updates. Direct and continuous interaction with community stakeholders, including parents/guardians of the targeted population contributed to build trust around the study and community willingness to be involved. It helped to raise awareness, drive away misconceptions, and allowed adaptation according to feedback from community members.

Indexed as

Typhoid FeverTyphoid-Paratyphoid VaccinesChildHumansInfantNepalVaccinationVaccines, ConjugateTyphoid-Paratyphoid VaccinesVaccines, Conjugatechildrencommunity-based randomized controlled trialcommunity stakeholderscommunity trustpublic engagementschool engagementTyphoidtyphoid conjugate vaccinetyphoid vaccine acceleration consortium

Identifiers

PMID35240925
PMCPMC9196674
OpenAlexW4214850380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.