ArticleVaccine: X2024
Oral cholera vaccine coverage in Goma, Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2022, following 2019-2020 targeted preventative mass campaigns.
Article in Vaccine: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oral Cholera Vaccines as Transmission-Interrupting Tools for Cholera Control: A Narrative Review.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Review
- Cholera in North Kivu: impacts of armed conflict on the resurgence of the epidemic, a narrative review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Cholera in Sub-Saharan Africa: Unveiling neglected drivers and pathways to elimination.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: In 2019-2020, preventative Oral Cholera Vaccine campaigns were conducted in 24/32 non-contiguous health areas of Goma, DR Congo. In August 2022, we measured coverage and factors potentially influencing success of the delivery strategy. Methods: We used random geo-sampled stratified cluster survey to estimate OCV coverage and assess population movement, diarrhea history, and reasons for non-vaccination. Results: 603 households were visited. Coverage with at least one dose was 46.4 % (95 %CI: 41.8-51.0), and 50.1 % (95 %CI: 45.4-54.8) in areas targeted by vaccination compared to 26.3 % (95 %CI: 19.2-34.9) in non-targeted areas. Additionally, 7.0 % of participants reported moving from outside Goma since 2019, and 5.4 % reported history of severe diarrhea. Absence and unawareness were the main reasons for non-vaccination. Conclusion: Results suggest that targeting non-contiguous urban areas had a coverage-diluting effect. Targeting entire geographically contiguous areas, adapted distribution, and regular catch-up campaigns are operational recommendations to reach higher coverages arising from the study.
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.