Kagina Benjamin M, Wiysonge Charles S, Machingaidze Shingai, Abdullahi Leila H, Adebayo Esther, Uthman Olalekan A, Hussey Gregory D
Vaccines for Africa Initiative, Division of Medical Microbiology and Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
BMJ Open. 2014 Feb 18;4(2):e004429. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004429.
Immunisation coverage data in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) suggest that more strategies need to be implemented to achieve and sustain optimal vaccine uptake. Among possible strategies to improve immunisation coverage are supplementary immunisation activities (SIAs). We are therefore interested in conducting a systematic review to assess whether SIAs complement routine immunisation programmes to improve vaccination coverage and prevent disease outbreaks.
Our systematic review will focus on studies conducted in LMICs. With the help of an information specialist, we will search for eligible studies in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Africa-Wide, Cochrane Library, WHOLIS, CINAHL, PDQ-Evidence as well as reference lists of relevant publications. Additionally, we will contact relevant organisations such as WHO and GAVI. Two authors will independently extract data from eligible studies and independently assess risk of bias by assessing the adequacy of study characteristics. The primary meta-analysis will use random effects models due to expected interstudies heterogeneity. Dichotomous data will be analysed using relative risk and continuous data using weighted mean differences (or standardised mean differences), both with 95% CIs.
The findings from this systematic review will be discussed in the context of strengthening routine childhood immunisation services, routine adolescent immunisation services and introduction of future vaccines against tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS.
Unbiased selection of many studies conducted in different settings. This will strengthen the validity of the review results.
Heterogeneity of the study settings of the low-income, lower-middle-income and upper-middle-income countries as well as heterogeneity in study designs.
低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)的免疫接种覆盖率数据表明,需要实施更多策略以实现并维持最佳疫苗接种率。补充免疫活动(SIAs)是提高免疫接种覆盖率的可能策略之一。因此,我们有兴趣进行一项系统评价,以评估补充免疫活动是否能补充常规免疫规划,从而提高疫苗接种覆盖率并预防疾病暴发。
我们的系统评价将聚焦于在低收入和中等收入国家开展的研究。在信息专家的帮助下,我们将在PubMed、科学网、Scopus、全非洲数据库、Cochrane图书馆、世界卫生组织全球疫苗和免疫联盟信息系统(WHOLIS)、护理学与健康领域数据库(CINAHL)、美国国立癌症研究所的医师数据查询证据数据库(PDQ-Evidence)以及相关出版物的参考文献列表中检索符合条件的研究。此外,我们将联系世界卫生组织和全球疫苗免疫联盟等相关组织。两名作者将独立从符合条件的研究中提取数据,并通过评估研究特征的充分性来独立评估偏倚风险。由于预期研究间存在异质性,主要的荟萃分析将使用随机效应模型。二分数据将使用相对风险进行分析,连续数据将使用加权平均差(或标准化平均差)进行分析,两者均带有95%置信区间。
本系统评价的结果将在加强儿童常规免疫服务、青少年常规免疫服务以及引入未来针对结核病和艾滋病毒/艾滋病的疫苗的背景下进行讨论。
无偏地选择了在不同环境中开展的许多研究。这将增强综述结果的有效性。
低收入、中低收入和中高收入国家研究环境的异质性以及研究设计的异质性。