ReviewBMJ open2022
Partnerships in the introduction of new routine vaccines in Bangladesh: evidence from a prospective process evaluation.
Review in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- An effective vaccine is only the first step: the need to create and sustain demand for TB vaccines.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2023Article
- COVID-19 vaccination success in Bangladesh: Key strategies were prompt response, early drives for vaccines, and effective awareness campaigns.Health science reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the contribution of partners in the introduction of two new vaccines concurrently: pneumococcal 10-valent conjugate vaccine (PCV-10) and inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) into the routine Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) in Bangladesh.
designWe conducted a prospective process evaluation that included the theory of change development, root cause analysis and in-depth investigation. As part of process tracking, we reviewed relevant documents, observed trainers' and vaccinators' training and key stakeholder meetings. We analysed the data thematically.
settingWe purposively selected eight
participantsNineteen national key informants were interviewed and 16 frontline health workers were invited to the group discussions considering their involvement in the vaccine introduction process.
resultsThe EPI experienced several challenges during the joint introduction of PCV-10 and IPV, such as frequent changes in the vaccine introduction schedule, delays in budget allocation, vaccine supply shortage and higher wastage rates of IPV. EPI addressed these challenges in collaboration with its partners, that is, the World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), who provided technical assistance to develop a training curriculum and communication materials and enhanced demand generation at the community level. In addition, the WHO conducted a country readiness assessment for PCV-10, and UNICEF supported vaccine shipment. Other government ministries, City Corporations and municipalities also supported the EPI.
conclusionsThe partnership among the EPI stakeholders effectively addressed various operational challenges during the joint introduction of PCV-10 and IPV helped strengthen Bangladesh's immunisation systems. These accomplishments are attributed to several factors that should be supported and strengthened for future vaccine introductions in Bangladesh and other low and-middle countries.
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.