Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38806437›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Identifying characteristics that enable resilient immunisation programmes: a scoping review.

Luke Baxter, Rebeccah Slater, Lindsay Hermany, Alexandra Bhatti, Amanda L Eiden, Rachel Mitrovich, Mark P Connolly, Samantha Vanderslott, Mawuli Nyaku, Aomesh Bhatt

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

Luke BaxterDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9548-7162
Rebeccah SlaterDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Lindsay HermanyMerck & Co., Inc, North Wales, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0009-0008-4940-2613
Alexandra BhattiMerck & Co., Inc, Kenilworth, New Jersey, USA.
Amanda L EidenMerck & Co., Inc, Kenilworth, New Jersey, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9422-1215
Rachel MitrovichMerck & Co., Inc, Kenilworth, New Jersey, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3973-9369
Mark P ConnollyUniversity of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Samantha VanderslottDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Mawuli Nyaku *Merck & Co., Inc, Kenilworth, New Jersey, USA.
Aomesh Bhatt *Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK aomesh.bhatt@paediatrics.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6206-0576

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the fragility of immunisation programmes and resulted in a significant reduction in vaccination rates, with increasing vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks consequently reported. These vulnerabilities underscore the importance of resilient immunisation programmes to ensure optimal performance during crises. To date, a framework for assessing immunisation programme resilience does not exist. We conducted a scoping review of immunisation programmes during times of crisis to identify factors that characterise resilient immunisation programmes, which may inform an Immunisation Programme Resilience Tool.

designScoping review design followed the Arksey and O'Malley framework, and manuscript reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews guidelines. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, CENTRAL, Embase, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science and databases were searched between 1 January 2011 and 2 September 2023. Citation searching of identified studies was also performed. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included primary empirical peer-reviewed studies that discussed the resilience of immunisation programme to crises, shocks or disruptions. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers screened records and performed data extraction. We extracted data on study location and design, crisis description, and resilience characteristics discussed, and identified evidence gaps in the literature. Findings were synthesised using tabulation and an evidence gap map.

resultsThirty-seven studies met the eligibility criteria. These studies captured research conducted across six continents, with most concentrated in Africa, Asia and Europe. One study had a randomised controlled trial design, while 36 studies had observational designs (15 analytical and 21 descriptive). We identified five characteristics of resilient immunisation programmes drawing on the Health System Resilience Index (Integration, Awareness, Resource Availability and Access, Adaptiveness and Self-regulation) and several evidence gaps in the literature.

conclusionsTo our knowledge, no immunisation programme resilience tool exists. We identified factors from the Health System Resilience Index coupled with factors identified through primary empirical evidence, which may inform development of an immunisation programme resilience tool.

Indexed as

COVID-19Immunization ProgramsHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Vaccinationpreventive medicinepublic healthsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38806437
PMCPMC11138283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.