Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41731408›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026

Measles-rubella surveillance and its facilitators and barriers in Bagmati province, Nepal: a mixed methods study.

Bipsana Shrestha, Surakshya Kunwar, Alina Upreti, Kshitij Karki, Paras Pangeni, Poonam Subedi, Leela Khanal, Rajeev Shrestha, Dipesh Tamrakar, Bhim Singh Tinkari and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

Bipsana ShresthaDepartment of Health Services, Kathmandu, Nepal. bipsanashrestha1996@gmail.com.
Surakshya KunwarDhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University Hospital, Dhulikhel, Nepal.
Alina UpretiTulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Kshitij KarkiGroup for Technical Assistance, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Paras PangeniInstitute of Medicine, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Poonam SubediDhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University Hospital, Dhulikhel, Nepal.
Leela KhanalIndependent Researcher, Kathmandu, 44600, Nepal.
Rajeev ShresthaDhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University Hospital, Dhulikhel, Nepal.
Dipesh TamrakarDhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University Hospital, Dhulikhel, Nepal.
Bhim Singh TinkariGroup for Technical Assistance, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Shyam Raj UpretiGroup for Technical Assistance, Lalitpur, Nepal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNepal committed to eliminate measles-rubella by 2023 by implementing the ‘Strategic plan for measles and rubella elimination in WHO South-East Region:2020–2024’. Following the impact of the pandemic on the national immunization program and services, Nepal has now revised its target to achieve elimination by 2026. High vaccine coverage and effective surveillance systems are indispensable to achieve measles elimination. This study aimed to assess the status of measles-rubella surveillance and understand the facilitators and barriers for the measles-rubella surveillance activities in selected municipalities of selected districts of Bagmati province of Nepal.

methodsA convergent parallel mixed method study was conducted, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative approaches. It was done in eight municipalities of the three districts which were purposively selected. Eight municipalities, including both rural and urban areas, were selected from the three districts. The health facilities included in the study were: a) All the health facilities that are part of the WHO reporting unit (RU) for Vaccine-Preventable Disease (VPD) surveillance b) purposively selected health facilities outside the WHO RU. A total of 14 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) were conducted with district and municipal stakeholders. For in-depth interviews (IDIs), two World Health Organization-Surveillance Medical Officers (WHO-SMOs) overseeing VPD surveillance and immunization activities in these districts, along with a VPD surveillance focal person from each selected reporting and non-reporting health facility, were purposively selected.

resultsThe key strategies to achieve measles elimination, that is the MR2 coverage of 95%, was not achieved in most of the municipalities. The main barriers to effective VPD surveillance among others included limited awareness of VPDs under surveillance, poor understanding of the measles elimination target, and lack of clarity on standard case definitions (SCDs) for suspected measles-rubella cases. The major facilitators for effective VPD surveillance included awareness on the importance of VPD surveillance in measles elimination, availability of standard case definition posted in all reporting health facilities, and timely case notification and investigation by RUs.

conclusionsThis study suggests that measles-rubella surveillance in the study sites can be strengthened through capacity building of health workers in VPD surveillance, ensuring the availability of the VPD surveillance field guide, availability of the dedicated focal person, emphasizing in data analysis and utilization of surveillance data.

Indexed as

Epidemiological MonitoringMeaslesRubellaHealth FacilitiesHumansImmunization ProgramsNepalPopulation SurveillanceVaccination CoverageImmunizationMeaslesMeasles-RubellaSurveillanceVaccine preventable diseaseVPD

Identifiers

PMID41731408
PMCPMC13036989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.