Immunization; InfectionNCT04042246
Effect of Knowledge on Vaccine Take-up in Adamawa State, Northeastern Nigeria
A study testing Information Provision in people with Immunization; Infection and Educational Problems, run by Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) at 1 site in Nigeria.
Trial summary
Child immunization is not a one-time behavior; rather, it is a repeated behavior within a specific timeframe. Not only the low immunization, but also the dropout of immunization and the delayed immunization from the recommended immunization schedule are prevalent and high in Africa. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Immunization; Infection, Educational Problems, Information Seeking Behavior
- What is being tested?
- Information Provision
- Type of treatment
- Vaccines, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 400 participants
- Where
- 1 siteNigeria
- Study dates
- 15 Sep 2019to 9 Feb 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- women with a child 12 months old or younger
Who cannot join
- exclude women who do not have a child 12 months or younger
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Nigeria1 site
Jada Local Government Primary Health Care Development Agency
Jada, Adamawa
About this study
Official title: Knowledge on Vaccination Schedule and Full Immunization, and Its Effect on Vaccine Take-up in Jada Local Government Area in Adamawa State, Northeastern Nigeria
Child immunization is not a one-time behavior; rather, it is a repeated behavior within a specific timeframe. Not only the low immunization, but also the dropout of immunization and the delayed immunization from the recommended immunization schedule are prevalent and high in Africa. The most common reason for the incomplete vaccination is that caregivers thought the children had already been fully immunized (44.8%), according to Nigeria Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) conducted in 2016/2017.
Caregivers' misconception of the complete immunization can be attributed to the complicated immunization schedule. In Nigeria, infants are supposed to receive 9 different types of vaccines at 5 different times within the first year since the births. To make things more complicated, the vaccine schedule changes over time; for example in Nigeria, the new vaccine, inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) was introduced in 2015 to be received at 14 weeks after births, and rotavirus vaccine and meningococcal A vaccine are scheduled for the introduction in 2019.
Read more
In this complicated and rapidly-changing environment regarding vaccination schedule, the goal of the study is to improve the understanding of vaccination completion and children's vaccination status among caregivers, which can then lead to the improved rate of full vaccination among children.
Objectives The main objectives of this study are to understand the impact of providing the general and tailored information on the vaccination schedule and vaccination status of women's children on the vaccine take-up. In this study, the investigators focus on women who has a child who is 12 months old or younger.
Hypothesis
The main hypothesis of this proposed study are as follows:
- Information on vaccination among caregivers: the general and tailored information on vaccination schedule and child's vaccination status, improves the knowledge on benefit and understanding of vaccination completion, vaccination schedule and the vaccination status of the children among caregivers
- Full immunization rate: through the improved knowledge level on the concept of vaccination completion and their children's vaccination status, the proposed study increases the full immunization rate among children
Read the detailed description
Background and Objectives Despite the proven benefit of vaccines, the child immunization rate has been stagnant and the rate in African countries lags behind other regions in the world. For example, the global coverage of three doses diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DPT3) has been stagnant at 85% since 2015, while DPT3 coverage in Africa remains at 72% since 2010. The distribution of unvaccinated children is unequal; out of about 20 million infants who are not fully vaccinated, more than 20 percent of them reside in three countries, including Nigeria, the proposed study site. Furthermore, Nigeria is one of the few countries where the coverage of DPT3 coverage has decreased over time: 54 percent in 2010 to 42 percent in 2017.
Child immunization is not a one-time behavior; rather, it is a repeated behavior within a specific timeframe. Not only the low immunization, but also the dropout of immunization and the delayed immunization from the recommended immunization schedule are prevalent and high in Africa. The most common reason for the incomplete vaccination is that caregivers thought the children had already been fully immunized (44.8%), according to Nigeria Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) conducted in 2016/2017.
Caregivers' misconception of the complete immunization can be attributed to the complicated immunization schedule. Each type and dose of vaccine has its own significance in terms of the type of preventable disease and the achievable efficacy level. In Nigeria, infants are supposed to receive 9 different types of vaccines at 5 different times within the first year since the births. For example, oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) is to protect infants from contracting polio, a highly contagious disease. At present, Nigeria is one of the three countries in the world, which have not eliminated polio. Infants are scheduled to receive OPV four times; at birth, 6, 10, and 14 weeks. The efficacy of the first dose OPV (oral polio vaccine) is 82%, while the second and the third doses are 90% and 99% or more, respectively. To make things more complicated, the vaccine schedule changes over time; for example in Nigeria, the new vaccine, inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) was introduced in 2015 to be received at 14 weeks after births, and rotavirus vaccine and meningococcal A vaccine are scheduled for the introduction in 2019.
In this complicated and rapidly-changing environment regarding vaccination schedule, the goal of the study is to improve the understanding of vaccination completion and children's vaccination status among caregivers, which can then lead to the improved rate of full vaccination among children.
Objectives The main objectives of this study are to understand the impact of providing the general and tailored information on the vaccination schedule and vaccination status of women's children on the vaccine take-up. This study focuses on women who has a child who is 12 months old or younger.
Hypothesis
The main hypothesis of this proposed study are as follows:
- Information on vaccination among caregivers: the general and tailored information on vaccination schedule and child's vaccination status, improves the knowledge on benefit and understanding of vaccination completion, vaccination schedule and the vaccination status of the children among caregivers
- Full immunization rate: through the improved knowledge level on the concept of vaccination completion and their children's vaccination status, the proposed study increases the full immunization rate among children
Literature Review Knowledge is powerful in shaping people's health behaviors. In a situation where the health behaviors among the population do not reach the optimal level, one obvious way to attempt to improve the situation is to provide the information to encourage the population for adopting the health behaviors.
In case of vaccination, information provision has a great potential to increase the take-up of vaccination, especially in places where one of the main perceived barriers is the lack of knowledge on the vaccination schedule, as is the case in Adamawa state.
However, the effectiveness of information provision on the vaccine take-up might differ, depending on the type of information provided. One study provided the information on the benefit of tetanus vaccines to caregivers in India and they found the strong effect of the information provision on the vaccine take-up. The effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messaging was statistically identical in their study. On the other hand, salient information, such as fear appeals, might be ineffective or it can even backfire. The investigators found, in the previous project, that in Jada Local Government Area, fear appeals intervention backfired on the tetanus-toxoid vaccine take-up among women who never received the vaccine.
If caregivers are not aware of the vaccination schedule as found in MICS 2016/2017, simply providing the information on the next vaccination schedule can be effective. Recent technological advancement makes it easy and cost-effective to send the reminder through SMS message.
Although SMS (Short Message Service) reminders are found to be effective in affecting one-time vaccine take-up, this intervention should be accompanied with the provision of more fundamental information, which can induce the repeated vaccination behaviors, to make the effect of intervention sustainable. This study proposes to provide fundamental information, which informs respondents the overall vaccination schedule, as well as tailored information, which informs where their children are in the vaccination schedule. The investigators hypothesize that, once respondents understand the overall vaccination schedule, it is easy to comprehend when and how many times more they should visit the clinic, instead of fully relying on the supply-side intervention such as SMS reminders.
- Being tested
- Information Provision
- Medical subject headings
- Infections, Information Seeking Behavior
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Information ProvisionBehavioural
Provide the information on the importance of the vaccination and tailored vaccination schedule
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control | No intervention | No intervention is implemented among Control |
| Treatment (Educational Information on Vaccination) | Experimental | Provide general and tailored information on vaccination and vaccination schedule at the end of the baseline survey Receives: Behavioral: Information Provision |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of participants who have the accurate knowledge level of vaccination, as assessed by survey questionnaire
The investigators will collect the information on respondents' knowledge on vaccination through surveys. The knowledge level is calculated from 5 questions: 1) the number of type of vaccines a child needs to receive before 12 months old, 2) the number of times a child needs to receive Pentavalent vaccine, 3) the last month when a child needs to receive Pentavalent vaccine, 4) the timing when a child needs to receive BCG vaccine, and 5) the number of clinic visits (at minimum) a child needs to make for complete vaccination. For each question, the score is 0 if wrong, or 1 if correct.
The knowledge level scale ranges from 0 to 5, which is the total number of correct answers.
Measured: 2 weeks
Number of participants who bring their children for the full vaccination, as assessed by the follow-up tracking survey at health clinics
The investigators will collect the information on the actual vaccination status among respondents' children
Measured: 9 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Aug 2019
- Study start15 Sep 2019
- Primary completion9 Feb 2020
- Study completion9 Feb 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Immunization; InfectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider
- Enrolment
- 400 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ryoko Sato, Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
- Investigators
- Ryoko Sato, Ph.D., Principal investigator, Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04042246
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- TBDNA
- Status last verified
- Jul 2020
- First submitted
- 29 Jul 2019
- Last updated
- 14 Jul 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Bolu O, Nnadi C, Damisa E, Braka F, Siddique A, Archer WR, Bammeke P, Banda R, Higgins J, Edukugo A, Nganda GW, Forbi JC, Liu H, Gidado S, Soghaier M, Franka R, Waziri N, Burns CC, Vertefeuille J, Wiesen E, Adamu U. Progress Toward Poliomyelitis Eradication - Nigeria, January-December 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018 Mar 2;67(8):253-256. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6708a5.
PubMed 29494568Feldstein LR, Mariat S, Gacic-Dobo M, Diallo MS, Conklin LM, Wallace AS. Global Routine Vaccination Coverage, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017 Nov 17;66(45):1252-1255. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6645a3.
PubMed 29145357Kazungu JS, Adetifa IMO. Crude childhood vaccination coverage in West Africa: Trends and predictors of completeness. Wellcome Open Res. 2017 Feb 15;2:12. doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.10690.1.
PubMed 28459105Kim-Farley RJ, Rutherford G, Lichfield P, Hsu ST, Orenstein WA, Schonberger LB, Bart KJ, Lui KJ, Lin CC. Outbreak of paralytic poliomyelitis, Taiwan. Lancet. 1984 Dec 8;2(8415):1322-4. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(84)90831-6.
PubMed 6150332Lukusa LA, Ndze VN, Mbeye NM, Wiysonge CS. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of educating parents on the benefits and schedules of childhood vaccinations in low and middle-income countries. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2018;14(8):2058-2068. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2018.1457931. Epub 2018 May 14.
PubMed 29580159Manakongtreecheep K. SMS-reminder for vaccination in Africa: research from published, unpublished and grey literature. Pan Afr Med J. 2017 Jun 22;27(Suppl 3):23. doi: 10.11604/pamj.supp.2017.27.3.12115. eCollection 2017.
PubMed 29296158Mbengue MAS, Mboup A, Ly ID, Faye A, Camara FBN, Thiam M, Ndiaye BP, Dieye TN, Mboup S. Vaccination coverage and immunization timeliness among children aged 12-23 months in Senegal: a Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis approach. Pan Afr Med J. 2017 Jun 21;27(Suppl 3):8. doi: 10.11604/pamj.supp.2017.27.3.11534. eCollection 2017.
PubMed 29296143Mutua MK, Kimani-Murage E, Ngomi N, Ravn H, Mwaniki P, Echoka E. Fully immunized child: coverage, timing and sequencing of routine immunization in an urban poor settlement in Nairobi, Kenya. Trop Med Health. 2016 May 16;44:13. doi: 10.1186/s41182-016-0013-x. eCollection 2016.
PubMed 27433132Powell-Jackson T, Fabbri C, Dutt V, Tougher S, Singh K. Effect and cost-effectiveness of educating mothers about childhood DPT vaccination on immunisation uptake, knowledge, and perceptions in Uttar Pradesh, India: A randomised controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2018 Mar 6;15(3):e1002519. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002519. eCollection 2018 Mar.
PubMed 29509769Tannenbaum MB, Hepler J, Zimmerman RS, Saul L, Jacobs S, Wilson K, Albarracin D. Appealing to fear: A meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and theories. Psychol Bull. 2015 Nov;141(6):1178-204. doi: 10.1037/a0039729.
PubMed 26501228VanderEnde K, Gacic-Dobo M, Diallo MS, Conklin LM, Wallace AS. Global Routine Vaccination Coverage - 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018 Nov 16;67(45):1261-1264. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6745a2.
PubMed 30439873Jacobson Vann JC, Jacobson RM, Coyne-Beasley T, Asafu-Adjei JK, Szilagyi PG. Patient reminder and recall interventions to improve immunization rates. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 18;1(1):CD003941. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003941.pub3.
PubMed 29342498
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Jul 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Knowledge on Vaccination Schedule and Full Immunization, and Its Effect on Vaccine Take-up in Jada Local Government Area in Adamawa State, Northeastern Nigeria
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04042246
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TBDNA
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 400 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)University, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Sep 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 9 Feb 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 9 Feb 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 Aug 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Child immunization is not a one-time behavior; rather, it is a repeated behavior within a specific timeframe. Not only the low immunization, but also the dropout of immunization and the delayed immunization from the recommended immunization schedule are prevalent and high in Africa. The most common reason for the incomplete vaccination is that caregivers thought the children had already been fully immunized (44.8%), according to Nigeria Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) conducted in 2016/2017.
Caregivers' misconception of the complete immunization can be attributed to the complicated immunization schedule. In Nigeria, infants are supposed to receive 9 different types of vaccines at 5 different times within the first year since the births. To make things more complicated, the vaccine schedule changes over time; for example in Nigeria, the new vaccine, inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) was introduced in 2015 to be received at 14 weeks after births, and rotavirus vaccine and meningococcal A vaccine are scheduled for the introduction in 2019.
In this complicated and rapidly-changing environment regarding vaccination schedule, the goal of the study is to improve the understanding of vaccination completion and children's vaccination status among caregivers, which can then lead to the improved rate of full vaccination among children.
Objectives The main objectives of this study are to understand the impact of providing the general and tailored information on the vaccination schedule and vaccination status of women's children on the vaccine take-up. In this study, the investigators focus on women who has a child who is 12 months old or younger.
Hypothesis
The main hypothesis of this proposed study are as follows:
- Information on vaccination among caregivers: the general and tailored information on vaccination schedule and child's vaccination status, improves the knowledge on benefit and understanding of vaccination completion, vaccination schedule and the vaccination status of the children among caregivers
- Full immunization rate: through the improved knowledge level on the concept of vaccination completion and their children's vaccination status, the proposed study increases the full immunization rate among children
Detailed description
Background and Objectives Despite the proven benefit of vaccines, the child immunization rate has been stagnant and the rate in African countries lags behind other regions in the world. For example, the global coverage of three doses diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DPT3) has been stagnant at 85% since 2015, while DPT3 coverage in Africa remains at 72% since 2010. The distribution of unvaccinated children is unequal; out of about 20 million infants who are not fully vaccinated, more than 20 percent of them reside in three countries, including Nigeria, the proposed study site. Furthermore, Nigeria is one of the few countries where the coverage of DPT3 coverage has decreased over time: 54 percent in 2010 to 42 percent in 2017.
Child immunization is not a one-time behavior; rather, it is a repeated behavior within a specific timeframe. Not only the low immunization, but also the dropout of immunization and the delayed immunization from the recommended immunization schedule are prevalent and high in Africa. The most common reason for the incomplete vaccination is that caregivers thought the children had already been fully immunized (44.8%), according to Nigeria Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) conducted in 2016/2017.
Caregivers' misconception of the complete immunization can be attributed to the complicated immunization schedule. Each type and dose of vaccine has its own significance in terms of the type of preventable disease and the achievable efficacy level. In Nigeria, infants are supposed to receive 9 different types of vaccines at 5 different times within the first year since the births. For example, oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) is to protect infants from contracting polio, a highly contagious disease. At present, Nigeria is one of the three countries in the world, which have not eliminated polio. Infants are scheduled to receive OPV four times; at birth, 6, 10, and 14 weeks. The efficacy of the first dose OPV (oral polio vaccine) is 82%, while the second and the third doses are 90% and 99% or more, respectively. To make things more complicated, the vaccine schedule changes over time; for example in Nigeria, the new vaccine, inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) was introduced in 2015 to be received at 14 weeks after births, and rotavirus vaccine and meningococcal A vaccine are scheduled for the introduction in 2019.
In this complicated and rapidly-changing environment regarding vaccination schedule, the goal of the study is to improve the understanding of vaccination completion and children's vaccination status among caregivers, which can then lead to the improved rate of full vaccination among children.
Objectives The main objectives of this study are to understand the impact of providing the general and tailored information on the vaccination schedule and vaccination status of women's children on the vaccine take-up. This study focuses on women who has a child who is 12 months old or younger.
Hypothesis
The main hypothesis of this proposed study are as follows:
- Information on vaccination among caregivers: the general and tailored information on vaccination schedule and child's vaccination status, improves the knowledge on benefit and understanding of vaccination completion, vaccination schedule and the vaccination status of the children among caregivers
- Full immunization rate: through the improved knowledge level on the concept of vaccination completion and their children's vaccination status, the proposed study increases the full immunization rate among children
Literature Review Knowledge is powerful in shaping people's health behaviors. In a situation where the health behaviors among the population do not reach the optimal level, one obvious way to attempt to improve the situation is to provide the information to encourage the population for adopting the health behaviors.
In case of vaccination, information provision has a great potential to increase the take-up of vaccination, especially in places where one of the main perceived barriers is the lack of knowledge on the vaccination schedule, as is the case in Adamawa state.
However, the effectiveness of information provision on the vaccine take-up might differ, depending on the type of information provided. One study provided the information on the benefit of tetanus vaccines to caregivers in India and they found the strong effect of the information provision on the vaccine take-up. The effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messaging was statistically identical in their study. On the other hand, salient information, such as fear appeals, might be ineffective or it can even backfire. The investigators found, in the previous project, that in Jada Local Government Area, fear appeals intervention backfired on the tetanus-toxoid vaccine take-up among women who never received the vaccine.
If caregivers are not aware of the vaccination schedule as found in MICS 2016/2017, simply providing the information on the next vaccination schedule can be effective. Recent technological advancement makes it easy and cost-effective to send the reminder through SMS message.
Although SMS (Short Message Service) reminders are found to be effective in affecting one-time vaccine take-up, this intervention should be accompanied with the provision of more fundamental information, which can induce the repeated vaccination behaviors, to make the effect of intervention sustainable. This study proposes to provide fundamental information, which informs respondents the overall vaccination schedule, as well as tailored information, which informs where their children are in the vaccination schedule. The investigators hypothesize that, once respondents understand the overall vaccination schedule, it is easy to comprehend when and how many times more they should visit the clinic, instead of fully relying on the supply-side intervention such as SMS reminders.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, care provider)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control | No intervention | –No intervention is implemented among Control |
| Treatment (Educational Information on Vaccination) | Experimental | Behavioral: Information ProvisionProvide general and tailored information on vaccination and vaccination schedule at the end of the baseline survey |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- women with a child 12 months old or younger
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- exclude women who do not have a child 12 months or younger
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Information ProvisionProvide the information on the importance of the vaccination and tailored vaccination schedule | Behavioural | Treatment (Educational Information on Vaccination) |
Primary outcome
Number of participants who have the accurate knowledge level of vaccination, as assessed by survey questionnaire
Time frame: 2 weeks
The investigators will collect the information on respondents' knowledge on vaccination through surveys. The knowledge level is calculated from 5 questions: 1) the number of type of vaccines a child needs to receive before 12 months old, 2) the number of times a child needs to receive Pentavalent vaccine, 3) the last month when a child needs to receive Pentavalent vaccine, 4) the timing when a child needs to receive BCG vaccine, and 5) the number of clinic visits (at minimum) a child needs to make for complete vaccination. For each question, the score is 0 if wrong, or 1 if correct. The knowledge level scale ranges from 0 to 5, which is the total number of correct answers.
Number of participants who bring their children for the full vaccination, as assessed by the follow-up tracking survey at health clinics
Time frame: 9 months
The investigators will collect the information on the actual vaccination status among respondents' children
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 Jul 2020.
- Background: PubMed 29494568Bolu O, Nnadi C, Damisa E, Braka F, Siddique A, Archer WR, Bammeke P, Banda R, Higgins J, Edukugo A, Nganda GW, Forbi JC, Liu H, Gidado S, Soghaier M, Franka R, Waziri N, Burns CC, Vertefeuille J, Wiesen E, Adamu U. Progress Toward Poliomyelitis Eradication - Nigeria, January-December 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018 Mar 2;67(8):253-256. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6708a5.
- Background: PubMed 29145357Feldstein LR, Mariat S, Gacic-Dobo M, Diallo MS, Conklin LM, Wallace AS. Global Routine Vaccination Coverage, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017 Nov 17;66(45):1252-1255. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6645a3.
- Background: PubMed 28459105Kazungu JS, Adetifa IMO. Crude childhood vaccination coverage in West Africa: Trends and predictors of completeness. Wellcome Open Res. 2017 Feb 15;2:12. doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.10690.1.
- Background: PubMed 6150332Kim-Farley RJ, Rutherford G, Lichfield P, Hsu ST, Orenstein WA, Schonberger LB, Bart KJ, Lui KJ, Lin CC. Outbreak of paralytic poliomyelitis, Taiwan. Lancet. 1984 Dec 8;2(8415):1322-4. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(84)90831-6.
- Background: PubMed 29580159Lukusa LA, Ndze VN, Mbeye NM, Wiysonge CS. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of educating parents on the benefits and schedules of childhood vaccinations in low and middle-income countries. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2018;14(8):2058-2068. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2018.1457931. Epub 2018 May 14.
- Background: PubMed 29296158Manakongtreecheep K. SMS-reminder for vaccination in Africa: research from published, unpublished and grey literature. Pan Afr Med J. 2017 Jun 22;27(Suppl 3):23. doi: 10.11604/pamj.supp.2017.27.3.12115. eCollection 2017.
- Background: PubMed 29296143Mbengue MAS, Mboup A, Ly ID, Faye A, Camara FBN, Thiam M, Ndiaye BP, Dieye TN, Mboup S. Vaccination coverage and immunization timeliness among children aged 12-23 months in Senegal: a Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis approach. Pan Afr Med J. 2017 Jun 21;27(Suppl 3):8. doi: 10.11604/pamj.supp.2017.27.3.11534. eCollection 2017.
- Background: PubMed 27433132Mutua MK, Kimani-Murage E, Ngomi N, Ravn H, Mwaniki P, Echoka E. Fully immunized child: coverage, timing and sequencing of routine immunization in an urban poor settlement in Nairobi, Kenya. Trop Med Health. 2016 May 16;44:13. doi: 10.1186/s41182-016-0013-x. eCollection 2016.
- Background: PubMed 29509769Powell-Jackson T, Fabbri C, Dutt V, Tougher S, Singh K. Effect and cost-effectiveness of educating mothers about childhood DPT vaccination on immunisation uptake, knowledge, and perceptions in Uttar Pradesh, India: A randomised controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2018 Mar 6;15(3):e1002519. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002519. eCollection 2018 Mar.
- Background: PubMed 26501228Tannenbaum MB, Hepler J, Zimmerman RS, Saul L, Jacobs S, Wilson K, Albarracin D. Appealing to fear: A meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and theories. Psychol Bull. 2015 Nov;141(6):1178-204. doi: 10.1037/a0039729.
- Background: PubMed 30439873VanderEnde K, Gacic-Dobo M, Diallo MS, Conklin LM, Wallace AS. Global Routine Vaccination Coverage - 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018 Nov 16;67(45):1261-1264. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6745a2.
- Background: PubMed 29342498Jacobson Vann JC, Jacobson RM, Coyne-Beasley T, Asafu-Adjei JK, Szilagyi PG. Patient reminder and recall interventions to improve immunization rates. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 18;1(1):CD003941. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003941.pub3.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Immunization; Infection
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
A Pivotal Safety and Immunogenicity GBS-NN/NN2 Vaccine Maternal Immunisation Trial
Streptococcus Agalactiae Infection, Neonatal Sepsis
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Comparing Immune Response of 2 vs 3 HPV Doses (27-45 Years Old)
Immunization, HPV Infection
Active, not recruiting
Working Towards Empowered Community-driven Approaches to Increase Vaccination and Preventive Care Engagement
COVID-19
Active, not recruitingObservational study
A Study to Learn About the Safety of PREVENAR 20 Vaccine in Infants Aged Between Two to Six Months
Pneumococcal Disease
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
An Exploratory Open-Label Clinical Trial Evaluating the Immunogenicity of the 9-valent 2-dose HPV Vaccination Regimen
HPV Infection
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Ryoko Sato, Ph.D. principal investigator
Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Information Provision in people with Immunization; Infection and Educational Problems, run by Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) at 1 site in Nigeria.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 Jul 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Nigeria. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Number of participants who have the accurate knowledge level of vaccination, as assessed by survey questionnaire (time frame: 2 weeks). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04042246, which also lists 12 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 14 Jul 2020.