Trial reportThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2025
Costs, Coverage, and Acceptability of Azithromycin Mass Administration to Children 1-11 Versus 1-59 Months Old to Reduce Mortality: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in Niger.
Trial report in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Azithromycin mass drug administration (MDA) for 1- to 59-month-olds reduces child mortality. However, guidelines restrict eligibility to 1- to 11-month-olds because of concerns about antimicrobial resistance. This cluster-randomized implementation trial was conducted in parallel with a larger efficacy trial and compared implementation outcomes between these approaches. Rural communities in Niger were randomly assigned to receive biannual azithromycin MDA for either 1- to 59-month-olds or 1- to 11-month-olds over 1 year. The primary outcome was the community-level cost per dose delivered. Secondary outcomes included reach (coverage), as well as acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility according to participants and providers. In November 2020, 40 eligible communities were randomly assigned to each arm, with 37 communities in the 1- to 59-month arm and 39 communities in the 1- to 11-month arm contributing to analyses. The mean cost per dose delivered was $6.50 lower (95% CI -$10.40 to -$3.70; P-value <0.001) in the 1- to 59-month arm ($1.60; 95% CI $1.00 to $2.30) compared with the 1- to 11-month arm ($8.20; 95% CI $7.60 to $8.80). Treatment coverage was similar by arm and exceeded 90% in both distributions. More caregivers in the 1- to 59-month arm found the intervention acceptable (mean difference 4.2%; 95% CI 0 to 8.4%; P-value 0.04) and appropriate (3.4%; 95% CI 0.1 to 6.8%; P-value 0.04) compared with the 1- to 11-month arm. When combining arms, all groups indicated that including 1- to 59-month-olds was more acceptable, appropriate, and feasible than restricting to 1- to 11-month-olds. No serious adverse events were reported. Overall, including 1- to 59-month-olds resulted in a lower cost per dose delivered than restricting to 1- to 11-month-olds. Community groups perceived both interventions to be acceptable, appropriate, and feasible, but they strongly preferred the 1- to 59-month treatment.
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.