Immunisation outreach vs usual care: Fully immunised ‐ regular immunisation outreach + non‐monetary incentive (
Immunisation outreach probably leads to higher proportion of children under 5 years of age fully immunised with all… compared with routine care (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Immunisation outreach vs routine care Proportion of children under 5 years of age fully immunised with all scheduled vaccines (outreach + non‐monetary incentive) · children under 5 years of age Immunisation outreach probably leads to higher proportion of children under 5 years of age fully immunised with all… compared with routine care (moderate certainty). Interventions for improving coverage of childhood immunisation in low‐ and middle‐income countries (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 6.66 [4.78, 9.28] | 1 study · 1242 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for improving coverage of childhood immunisation in low‐ and middle‐income countries 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.