ArticleBMJ public health2026
Effectiveness of mobile vaccine clinics on COVID-19 vaccination uptake in the USA: an observational study.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. 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.
- Health, economic, and equity impact of a COVID-19 mobile vaccine clinic program in US: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Lancet regional health. Americas · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Little is known regarding the impact of mobile vaccine clinics (MVCs) on COVID-19 vaccination rates in the USA. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of MVCs in increasing COVID-19 vaccination uptake in the state of Utah. Methods: In this longitudinal observational study, we collected and analysed data on MVCs and COVID-19 vaccinations in Utah from 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022. The primary exposure was the weekly number of MVC days in host ZIP codes (where MVCs operated). The secondary exposure was the weekly number of MVC days in nearby ZIP codes. The outcome was the weekly first-dose vaccination rate. A mixed-effects zero-inflated beta regression model was used. Confounding variables adjusted in the model included the Health Accessibility Barriers Index, the Resource-Constrained Health System Index, the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), vaccine hesitancy and prior vaccination rates. Results: MVCs were deployed for 2760 days (8.5 MVC days per 10 000 residents). MVC density was higher in areas with high proportions of Hispanic populations (11.7 days per 10 000 residents), urban areas (9.0 days per 100 000 residents), and areas with very high SVI (14.9 days per 10 000 residents). Each additional MVC day in a given week reduced the odds of no vaccination in that week by 79.5% (OR=0.205, 95% CI 0.064 to 0.659) in host ZIP codes and by 21.1% (OR=0.789, 95% CI 0.732 to 0.849) in nearby ZIP codes. For ZIP codes with vaccinations, each additional MVC day increased the odds of weekly vaccination rates by 1.6% (OR=1.016, 95% CI 1.001 to 1.032) and by 0.6% (OR=1.006, 95% CI 1.003 to 1.009) in nearby ZIP codes. Conclusions: MVCs increased COVID-19 vaccination uptake on both host and nearby ZIP codes. Policymakers can leverage these findings to use MVCs as a promising strategy to improve vaccine coverage for future pandemic responses or other vaccination programmes.
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.