ReviewTherapeutic advances in vaccines and immunotherapy2026
Effectiveness and feasibility of vaccination interventions for Indigenous and hard-to-reach populations in Latin America and the Caribbean: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Therapeutic advances in vaccines and immunotherapy, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Persistent vaccination inequities affect Indigenous and hard-to-reach populations in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), yet evidence on effective interventions remains fragmented. Objectives: To synthesize evidence on the effectiveness and feasibility of interventions designed to improve vaccination coverage among Indigenous and hard-to-reach populations in LAC. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Methods: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and PAHO/WHO repositories for studies published between January 2015 and March 2025. Eligible studies reported primary data on vaccination coverage among Indigenous, rural, migrant, or marginalized populations in LAC. Two independent reviewers performed screening, data extraction, and quality assessment (JBI tools). Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for comparable outcomes, with subgroup analyses by population and intervention type. Feasibility was assessed across logistical, financial, and cultural domains using an implementation science framework. Results: Of 2750 records, 21 studies met inclusion criteria, representing 10 LAC countries. Interventions included community health worker (CHW) outreach (43%), mobile units (29%), school-based delivery (14%), digital reminders (10%), and culturally tailored campaigns (5%). Meta-analysis of 16 studies showed that individuals receiving interventions were 64% more likely to achieve complete vaccination (risk ratio (RR) = 1.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.32-2.04). Effects were stronger for Indigenous populations (RR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.42-2.25) than for other rural groups (RR = 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20-1.80). CHW outreach and mobile units showed the largest effects. Feasibility was highest for CHW and culturally adapted strategies due to community trust, low costs, and adaptability. Conclusion: Community-based, culturally grounded interventions, particularly those integrating CHW networks and Indigenous leadership, significantly improve vaccination coverage among hard-to-reach populations in LAC. These findings support scaling equity-centered models within national immunization policies.
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.