Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39971583›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2025

Evaluating geographic accessibility to COVID-19 vaccination across 54 countries/regions.

Yanjia Cao, Tianyu Li, Huanfa Chen, Qunshan Zhao, Jiashuo Sun, Karen Ann Grépin, Jeon-Young Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The KPROCS Study: A Real-World and Research Resource to Investigate Multilevel Determinants of Ovarian Cancer Treatment and Survival.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Yanjia Cao *Department of Geography, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8294-8924
Tianyu Li *Department of Geography, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.
Huanfa ChenUCL Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, London, UK huanfa.chen@ucl.ac.uk.
Qunshan ZhaoUrban Big Data Centre, School of Social & Political Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Jiashuo SunDepartment of Geography, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.
Karen Ann GrépinSchool of Public Health, University of Hong Kong Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4368-0045
Jeon-Young KangDepartment of Geography, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has revealed significant disparities in global vaccine accessibility, particularly affecting low and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, current research on COVID-19 vaccine accessibility primarily focuses on individual countries or high-income countries (HIC). We aimed to evaluate geographic accessibility to COVID-19 vaccination on a multicountry scale, covering comparisons across LMICs and HICs. Additionally, we explored the potential economic factors related to accessibility and their impacts on health outcomes.

methodsWe collected population data at a 1 km resolution and geocoded all vaccination sites across the selected countries/regions. Four measures were used to evaluate vaccine accessibility from different perspectives: population coverage with varying travel time thresholds, driving time to vaccination sites, the number of sites within a 30-min threshold and a geographic accessibility index using enhanced two-step floating catchment area method. Finally, we explored the relationships between geographic accessibility and several factors: gross domestic product per capita, vaccination uptake and mortality.

findingsWe found substantial disparities in vaccine accessibility across the selected countries/regions. In 24.07% of these countries/regions, over 95% of the population can access the nearest vaccination services within 15 min. In contrast, in countries/regions such as Manitoba (Canada), Zimbabwe and Bhutan, less than 30% of the population can reach these sites within 60 min. Underserved areas, termed 'vaccine deserts', were identified in both HICs and LMICs. We found that countries/regions with higher vaccine accessibility tend to achieve higher vaccination rates, whereas those with lower vaccine accessibility are likely to experience substantial increases in COVID-19 mortality rates.

conclusionLMICs require enhanced attention to improve geographic accessibility to vaccination. Additionally, there are internal disparities in accessibility within both HICs and LMICs. National public health officials and global health initiatives are suggested to prioritize 'vaccine deserts' and to ensure equitable vaccine access in future pandemics.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityVaccinationDeveloping CountriesGlobal HealthHumansSARS-CoV-2Vaccination CoverageCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19Geographic information systemsGlobal HealthHealth Services Accessibility

Identifiers

PMID39971583
PMCPMC11840912

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.