Suppr超能文献

比较56个国家疫苗接种覆盖率中基于多变量与基于财富的不平等:寻求更好衡量疫苗接种覆盖率公平性的方法

Comparing Multivariate with Wealth-Based Inequity in Vaccination Coverage in 56 Countries: Toward a Better Measure of Equity in Vaccination Coverage.

作者信息

Patenaude Bryan N, Sriudomporn Salin, Odihi Deborah, Mak Joshua, de Broucker Gatien

机构信息

International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

出版信息

Vaccines (Basel). 2023 Feb 24;11(3):536. doi: 10.3390/vaccines11030536.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Following a call from the World Health Organization in 2017 for a methodology to monitor immunization coverage equity in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, this study applies the Vaccine Economics Research for Sustainability and Equity (VERSE) vaccination equity toolkit to measure national-level inequity in immunization coverage using a multidimensional ranking procedure and compares this with traditional wealth-quintile based ranking methods for assessing inequity. The analysis covers 56 countries with a most recent Demographic & Health Survey (DHS) between 2010 and 2022. The vaccines examined include Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG), Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis-containing vaccine doses 1 through 3 (DTP1-3), polio vaccine doses 1-3 (Polio1-3), the measles-containing vaccine first dose (MCV1), and an indicator for being fully immunized for age with each of these vaccines.

MATERIALS & METHODS: The VERSE equity toolkit is applied to 56 DHS surveys to rank individuals by multiple disadvantages in vaccination coverage, incorporating place of residence (urban/rural), geographic region, maternal education, household wealth, sex of the child, and health insurance coverage. This rank is used to estimate a concentration index and absolute equity coverage gap (AEG) between the top and bottom quintiles, ranked by multiple disadvantages. The multivariate concentration index and AEG are then compared with traditional concentration index and AEG measures, which use household wealth as the sole criterion for ranking individuals and determining quintiles.

RESULTS

We find significant differences between the two sets of measures in almost all settings. For fully-immunized for age status, the inequities captured using the multivariate metric are between 32% and 324% larger than what would be captured examining inequities using traditional metrics. This results in a missed coverage gap of between 1.1 and 46.4 percentage points between the most and least advantaged.

CONCLUSIONS

The VERSE equity toolkit demonstrated that wealth-based inequity measures systematically underestimate the gap between the most and least advantaged in fully-immunized for age coverage, correlated with maternal education, geography, and sex by 1.1-46.4 percentage points, globally. Closing the coverage gap between the bottom and top wealth quintiles is unlikely to eliminate persistent socio-demographic inequities in either coverage or access to vaccines. The results suggest that pro-poor interventions and programs utilizing needs-based targeting, which reflects poverty only, should expand their targeting criteria to include other dimensions to reduce systemic inequalities, holistically. Additionally, a multivariate metric should be considered when setting targets and measuring progress toward reducing inequities in healthcare coverage.

摘要

引言

2017年,世界卫生组织呼吁采用一种方法来监测与《2030年可持续发展议程》相一致的免疫接种覆盖率公平性,本研究应用疫苗可持续性与公平性经济研究(VERSE)疫苗接种公平性工具包,通过多维排名程序来衡量国家层面免疫接种覆盖率的不公平性,并将其与传统的基于财富五分位数的排名方法进行比较,以评估不公平性。该分析涵盖了56个在2010年至2022年期间进行了最新人口与健康调查(DHS)的国家。所考察的疫苗包括卡介苗(BCG)、1至3剂含白喉-破伤风-百日咳疫苗(DTP1-3)、1至3剂脊髓灰质炎疫苗(Polio1-3)、首剂含麻疹疫苗(MCV1),以及针对每种疫苗按年龄完全免疫的指标。

材料与方法

将VERSE公平性工具包应用于56次DHS调查,根据疫苗接种覆盖率方面的多重不利因素对个体进行排名,这些因素包括居住地(城市/农村)、地理区域、母亲教育程度、家庭财富、儿童性别和健康保险覆盖情况。该排名用于估计浓度指数以及按多重不利因素排名的最高和最低五分位数之间的绝对公平覆盖率差距(AEG)。然后将多变量浓度指数和AEG与传统的浓度指数和AEG测量方法进行比较,传统方法以家庭财富作为对个体进行排名和确定五分位数的唯一标准。

结果

我们发现在几乎所有情况下,这两组测量方法之间都存在显著差异。对于按年龄完全免疫状态,使用多变量指标所捕捉到的不公平性比使用传统指标考察不公平性时所捕捉到的不公平性大32%至324%。这导致最具优势和最不具优势群体之间的覆盖率差距遗漏了1.1至46.4个百分点。

结论

VERSE公平性工具包表明,基于财富的不公平性测量方法系统性地低估了在按年龄完全免疫覆盖率方面最具优势和最不具优势群体之间的差距,在全球范围内,这种差距与母亲教育程度、地理位置和性别相关,相差1.1至46.4个百分点。缩小最低和最高财富五分位数之间的覆盖率差距不太可能消除在疫苗接种覆盖率或获取疫苗方面持续存在的社会人口学不公平现象。结果表明,仅以反映贫困的需求为导向的扶贫干预措施和项目应扩大其目标设定标准,纳入其他维度,以全面减少系统性不平等。此外,在设定目标和衡量减少医疗保健覆盖率不公平性的进展时,应考虑使用多变量指标。

相似文献

8
Increased immunization coverage addresses the equity gap in Nepal.免疫接种覆盖率的提高缩小了尼泊尔的公平差距。
Bull World Health Organ. 2017 Apr 1;95(4):261-269. doi: 10.2471/BLT.16.178327. Epub 2017 Feb 2.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

6
Health Care Disparities and the Future of Pancreatic Cancer Care.医疗保健差异与胰腺癌护理的未来。
Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2021 Oct;30(4):759-771. doi: 10.1016/j.soc.2021.06.012.
7

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验