Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37474227›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Global health2023

Health effects of routine measles vaccination and supplementary immunisation activities in 14 high-burden countries: a Dynamic Measles Immunization Calculation Engine (DynaMICE) modelling study.

Megan Auzenbergs, Han Fu, Kaja Abbas, Simon R Procter, Felicity T Cutts, Mark Jit

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Megan AuzenbergsDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. Electronic address: megan.auzenbergs@lshtm.ac.uk.
Han FuDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Kaja AbbasDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Public Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India.
Simon R ProcterDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Felicity T CuttsDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Mark JitDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK; School of Public Health, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
University of Hong Kong · HKLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWHO recommends at least 95% population coverage with two doses of measles-containing vaccine (MCV). Most countries worldwide use routine services to offer a first dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) and later, a second dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV2). Many countries worldwide conduct supplementary immunisation activities (SIAs), offering vaccination to all people in a specific age range irrespective of previous vaccination history. We aimed to estimate the relative effects of each dose and delivery route in 14 countries with high measles burden.

methodsWe used an age-structured compartmental dynamic model, the Dynamic Measles Immunization Calculation Engine (DynaMICE), to assess the effects of different vaccination strategies on measles susceptibility and burden during 2000-20 in 14 countries with high measles incidence (containing 53% of the global birth cohort and 78% of the global measles burden). Country-specific routine MCV1 and MCV2 coverage data during 1980-2020 were obtained from the WHO and UNICEF Estimates of National Immunization Coverage database for all modelled countries and SIA data were obtained from the WHO summary of measles and rubella SIAs. We estimated the incremental health effects of different vaccination strategies using prevented cases of measles and deaths from measles and their efficiency using the incremental number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent an additional measles case.

findingsCompared with no vaccination, MCV1 implementation was estimated to have prevented 824 million cases of measles and 9·6 million deaths from measles, with a median NNV of 1·41 (IQR 1·35-1·44). Adding routine MCV2 to MCV1 was estimated to have prevented 108 million cases and 404 270 deaths, whereas adding SIAs to MCV1 was estimated to have prevented 256 million cases and 4·4 million deaths. Despite larger incremental effects, adding SIAs to MCV1 (median incremental NNV 6·02, 5·30-7·68) showed reduced efficiency compared with adding routine MCV2 (5·41, 4·76-6·11).

interpretationVaccination strategies, including non-selective SIAs, reach a greater proportion of children who are unvaccinated and reduce measles burden more than MCV2 alone, but efficiency is lower because of the wide age range targeted by SIAs. This analysis provides information to help improve the health effects and efficiency of measles vaccination strategies. The interplay between MCV1, MCV2, and SIAs should be considered when planning future measles vaccination strategies.

fundingGavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Indexed as

Immunization ProgramsMeaslesChildHumansImmunizationImmunization ScheduleInfantMeasles VaccineVaccinationMeasles Vaccine

Identifiers

PMID37474227
PMCPMC10369016
OpenAlexW4384923249

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.