ArticleScientific reports2025
Factors determining the overlap between recipients of the first and second dose of measles vaccine in nineteen surveys.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Many countries schedule a second dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV2) for children in their second year of life. The correlation between recipients of the first dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) and MCV2 is poorly understood but is important for estimating population levels of measles immunity and for meeting elimination targets. Using data from 19 surveys from Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) we computed the percentage of MCV1 recipients with subsequent MCV2 and of MCV2 recipients with previous MCV1. All countries included in our study recommended MCV1 in the first year of life and MCV2 in the second year of life. For 2 surveys we computed the variation of those percentages over the country's geographical regions. We computed adjusted odds ratios for the association of this percentage with age, sex, residency, mother's education, wealth and birth order. For most of the surveys, over 50% of MCV1 recipients received MCV2, but there was more than 30% MCV1 to MCV2 dropout in more than half of the surveys. The percentage of MCV1 recipients with MCV2 was statistically significantly higher if they received MCV1 below age 12 months and the percentage increased with increasing education status of the mother and higher income levels. A small number of MCV2 recipients were not found to have received MCV1, despite marked on record as having received MCV2 implies having previously received MCV1 (by definition of the survey data collection methodology). Our analyses have highlighted important shortfalls by age, country, mother's education and income status in the proportion of MCV1 recipients who subsequently receive MCV2. Targeting those differentials is essential for achieving the goals of measles elimination.
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.