ReviewJournal of epidemiology and community health2026
Improving childhood vaccination among minority populations in middle- and high-income countries: a realist review of health system interventions.
Review in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Child poverty and declining measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccination in England, 2015 to 2024. A longitudinal ecological study at local area level.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost minority populations in Europe generally exhibit lower childhood vaccine uptake compared with the general population. Improving uptake in these populations requires contextually tailored interventions. We conducted a realist review to identify interventions effective at improving measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake among underserved communities.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane and ProQuest for English language publications from 2005 to 2022. Following title and abstract screening, full texts were assessed for relevance. Grey literature and reference lists were also examined. Data extraction and analysis were performed independently by two reviewers. Programme theories were generated from included articles and data extraction focusing on context-mechanism-outcome configurations.
resultsOf 1942 screened titles, 87 studies underwent full-text review of which 34 met inclusion criteria. 10 primary intervention categories were identified: parental and youth education; clinical outreach; data infrastructure/quality improvement; health provider training; school-based education; digital technology for patients; cash incentives; home visits; comic books; community leaders' education; and consent policy changes. Analysis highlighting contextual factors enabling or hindering each intervention category's success was conducted.
conclusionsMulticomponent strategies proved the most effective, with strongest evidence supporting home visits, parental and youth education, school-based programmes, data infrastructure and quality improvement and healthcare provider training. Moderate evidence supported reminders/recall strategies, comic books and consent policy changes, while digital technology for patients and cash incentives showed limited effectiveness. Importantly, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Policymakers and practitioners should tailor and adapt interventions to the unique cultural, social and economic contexts of each group to ensure success. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021268068.
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.