Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39042433›Full record

SynthesisJMIR public health and surveillance2024

Effectiveness of Catch-Up Vaccination Interventions Versus Standard or Usual Care Procedures in Increasing Adherence to Recommended Vaccinations Among Different Age Groups: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Before-After Studies.

Alessandra Fallucca, Walter Priano, Alessandro Carubia, Patrizia Ferro, Vincenzo Pisciotta, Alessandra Casuccio, Vincenzo Restivo

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Alessandra FalluccaDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialities, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5303-9609
Walter PrianoDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialities, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4121-8711
Alessandro CarubiaDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialities, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0009-0007-1921-6548
Patrizia FerroDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialities, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0009-0004-4435-6997
Vincenzo PisciottaDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialities, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4139-5873
Alessandra CasuccioDepartment of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialities, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5676-9535
Vincenzo RestivoSchool of Medicine, University Kore of Enna, Enna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5406-884X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo address the global challenge of vaccine hesitancy, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization strongly promotes vaccination reminder and recall interventions. Coupled with the new opportunities presented by scientific advancements, these measures are crucial for successfully immunizing target population groups.

objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of various interventions in increasing vaccination coverage compared with standard or usual care. The review will cover all vaccinations recommended for different age groups.

methodsIn February 2022, 2 databases were consulted, retrieving 1850 studies. Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 79 manuscripts were included after the assessment phase. These comprised 46 trials/randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 33 before-after studies. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model was performed with STATA software (version 14.1.2). The selected outcome was the risk ratio (RR) of vaccination coverage improvement effectiveness. Additionally, meta-regression analyses were conducted for the included manuscripts.

resultsThe analyses showed an overall efficacy of RR 1.22 (95% CI 1.19-1.26) for RCTs and RR 1.70 (95% CI 1.54-1.87) for before-after studies when considering all interventions cumulatively. Subgroup analyses identified multicomponent interventions (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.36-1.85) and recall clinical interventions (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.17-1.32) as the most effective in increasing vaccination coverage for RCTs. By contrast, educational interventions (RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.60-2.83) and multicomponent interventions (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.43-1.82) achieved the highest increases for before-after studies. Meta-regression analyses indicated that the middle-aged adult population was associated with a higher increase in vaccination coverage (RCT: coefficient 0.54, 95% CI 0.12-0.95; before-after: coefficient 1.27, 95% CI 0.70-1.84).

conclusionsCommunity, family, and health care-based multidimensional interventions, as well as education-based catch-up strategies, effectively improve vaccination coverage. Therefore, their systematic implementation is highly relevant for targeting undervaccinated population groups. This approach aligns with national vaccination schedules and aims to eliminate or eradicate vaccine-preventable diseases.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicVaccinationHumansVaccination CoverageVaccination Hesitancyadherencecatch-up interventionseducationeducation basedhealth care basedimmunizationmeta-analysismulticomponentmultidimensional interventionPRISMArecall interventionremindrewardsystematic reviewvaccinationvaccination coveragevaccinevaccine literacyvaccine strategies

Identifiers

PMID39042433
PMCPMC11303899

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.