ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Towards a sustainable model for a digital learning network in support of the Immunization Agenda 2030 -a mixed methods study with a transdisciplinary component.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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.
- Accelerating Evidence-Informed Vaccine Introductions: Lessons from the Hexavalent Early Adopters Workshop.Vaccines · 2026Article
- WHO and Its Enduring Commitment to Global Pediatrics.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2025Article
- Decolonizing infectious disease programs: A mixed methods analysis of a novel multi-country virtual training for Female Genital Schistosomiasis.PLOS global public health · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) has been endorsed at the World Health Assembly as the world's strategy for immunization. The Movement for IA2030 is a voluntary collective of immunization practitioners, principally from low- and middle-income countries, who have pledged to support each other to accelerate local action in support of this global strategy. Collective action is facilitated by the peer learning platform established by The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF). We reviewed existing data from Movement participants and collected additional survey data to explore two aspects of sustainability of the Movement: why immunization practitioners participate and how much time and resources they contribute. Quantitative analyses of an existing large data set (n = 5682 participants) were complemented by analyses of data collected through a new survey (n = 291) and focus groups of Movement participants. The most commonly cited reason for participating (32% of responses) was to share experience and learn from others. This was generally true across all levels of experience, gender and place of work, suggesting a common rationale among immunization practitioners in different settings. It was a particularly strong motivation for the most experienced practitioners and those working in a setting with a strong organizational learning culture. New survey data revealed a high degree of intrinsic personal motivation to participate, through commitment of significant time and financial resources, with 47% (n = 136) of respondents committing personal finances to implement an action plan. Focus group discussions provided insights into the implications of findings for sustaining the Movement. Collectively, the analyses highlight key aspects of voluntary collective action to achieve global immunization goals through local action, to inform efforts to ensure long-term sustainability of the Movement.
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.