Kirkby Katherine, Antiporta Daniel A, Schlotheuber Anne, Menéndez Patricia, Danovaro-Holliday M Carolina, Hosseinpoor Ahmad Reza
Department of Data and Analytics, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.
School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia.
Vaccines (Basel). 2024 Nov 26;12(12):1324. doi: 10.3390/vaccines12121324.
Monitoring immunization inequalities is crucial for achieving equity in vaccine coverage. Summary measures of health inequality provide a single numerical expression of immunization inequality. However, the impact of different summary measures on conclusions about immunization inequalities has not been thoroughly studied. : We used disaggregated data from household surveys conducted in 92 low- and middle-income countries between 2013 and 2022. Inequality was assessed for two indicators of childhood immunization coverage [three doses of combined diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine and non-receipt of DTP vaccine or "zero-dose"] across three dimensions of inequality (place of residence, economic status, and subnational region). We calculated 16 summary measures of health inequality and compared the results. These measures of inequality showed more similarities than differences, but the choice of measure can affect inequality assessment. Absolute and relative measures sometimes produced differing results, showing the importance of using both types of measures when assessing immunization inequality. Outliers influenced differences and ratios, but the effect of outlier estimates was moderated through the use of complex measures, which consider all subgroups and their population sizes. The choice of appropriate complex measure depends on the audience, interpretation, and outlier sensitivity. Summary measures are useful for assessing changes in inequality over time and making comparisons across different geographical areas and vaccines, but assumptions and value judgements made when selecting summary measures of inequality should be made explicit in research.
监测免疫接种不平等对于实现疫苗接种覆盖率的公平性至关重要。健康不平等的汇总指标提供了免疫接种不平等的单一数值表达。然而,不同汇总指标对免疫接种不平等结论的影响尚未得到充分研究。我们使用了2013年至2022年期间在92个低收入和中等收入国家进行的家庭调查的分类数据。针对儿童免疫接种覆盖率的两个指标(三剂白喉、破伤风和百日咳联合疫苗以及未接种白喉、破伤风和百日咳联合疫苗或“零剂次”),在不平等的三个维度(居住地点、经济状况和国家以下区域)评估不平等情况。我们计算了16种健康不平等汇总指标并比较了结果。这些不平等指标显示出的相似性多于差异,但指标的选择会影响不平等评估。绝对指标和相对指标有时会产生不同的结果,这表明在评估免疫接种不平等时同时使用这两种指标的重要性。异常值影响差异和比率,但通过使用考虑所有亚组及其人口规模的复杂指标,异常值估计的影响得到了缓和。选择合适的复杂指标取决于受众、解释和异常值敏感性。汇总指标有助于评估不平等随时间的变化,并在不同地理区域和疫苗之间进行比较,但在研究中应明确选择不平等汇总指标时所做的假设和价值判断。