Sebastian Nielsen , Sören Möller , Christine Stabell Benn , Peter Aaby
{"title":"卫生运动信息质量对成果评估的重要性。几内亚比绍和孟加拉国的案例研究","authors":"Sebastian Nielsen , Sören Möller , Christine Stabell Benn , Peter Aaby","doi":"10.1016/j.jvacx.2024.100588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Numerous national health intervention campaigns, e.g. supplementary immunization campaigns/activities (SIAs), have been conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) in the last decades. These campaigns are rarely evaluated for overall health outcomes. Information on campaigns is critical for evaluations. We investigated; 1) quality of campaign information sources and 2) implication of quality for outcome evaluations.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We focused on three campaign types: oral polio vaccine (OPV), vitamin A supplementation (VAS) and measles vaccine (MV) campaigns in two case countries, for which “gold standard” information on campaigns collected regularly at Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSS) sites: Guinea-Bissau and Bangladesh. We compared the campaign information from HDSS with information from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Rotary Foundation (Rotary, only OPV campaigns). First, campaigns were matched and compared based on intervention type, date of campaign and target age group. Second, we assessed the implications of using various sources of campaign information on the estimated effect of OPV campaigns on all-cause under-3-year mortality in Cox proportional hazards regression models.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The proportion of matched OPV campaigns was highest between HDSS and Rotary. VAS campaigns (only information from HDSS and WHO) matched poorly. The estimated effect of OPV campaigns information on child mortality in Bangladesh went from being statistically significant (HR = 0.69 (0.52–0.90)) using HDSS campaign information to not being significant (HR = 0.93 (0.71–1.21) using WHO campaign information.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Compared with the HDSS, Rotary had the best campaign information on the conduct of OPV campaigns, whereas the WHO quality of campaign information was low for both OPV and VAS. A low quality of campaign information may alter conclusions of health outcome evaluations. Reliable and precise information on campaigns is essential to assess their effects. Public and private campaign stakeholders should track campaign information meticulously and support that publicly data is available for researchers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":43021,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine: X","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100588"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The importance of quality of health campaign information for outcome evaluation. A case study from Guinea-Bissau and Bangladesh\",\"authors\":\"Sebastian Nielsen , Sören Möller , Christine Stabell Benn , Peter Aaby\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jvacx.2024.100588\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Numerous national health intervention campaigns, e.g. supplementary immunization campaigns/activities (SIAs), have been conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) in the last decades. These campaigns are rarely evaluated for overall health outcomes. Information on campaigns is critical for evaluations. We investigated; 1) quality of campaign information sources and 2) implication of quality for outcome evaluations.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We focused on three campaign types: oral polio vaccine (OPV), vitamin A supplementation (VAS) and measles vaccine (MV) campaigns in two case countries, for which “gold standard” information on campaigns collected regularly at Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSS) sites: Guinea-Bissau and Bangladesh. We compared the campaign information from HDSS with information from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Rotary Foundation (Rotary, only OPV campaigns). First, campaigns were matched and compared based on intervention type, date of campaign and target age group. Second, we assessed the implications of using various sources of campaign information on the estimated effect of OPV campaigns on all-cause under-3-year mortality in Cox proportional hazards regression models.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The proportion of matched OPV campaigns was highest between HDSS and Rotary. VAS campaigns (only information from HDSS and WHO) matched poorly. The estimated effect of OPV campaigns information on child mortality in Bangladesh went from being statistically significant (HR = 0.69 (0.52–0.90)) using HDSS campaign information to not being significant (HR = 0.93 (0.71–1.21) using WHO campaign information.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Compared with the HDSS, Rotary had the best campaign information on the conduct of OPV campaigns, whereas the WHO quality of campaign information was low for both OPV and VAS. A low quality of campaign information may alter conclusions of health outcome evaluations. Reliable and precise information on campaigns is essential to assess their effects. Public and private campaign stakeholders should track campaign information meticulously and support that publicly data is available for researchers.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vaccine: X\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100588\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vaccine: X\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259013622400161X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccine: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259013622400161X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景过去几十年来,中低收入国家(LMIC)开展了大量国家卫生干预活动,如补充免疫接种运动/活动(SIAs)。但很少对这些活动的总体健康结果进行评估。有关活动的信息对评估至关重要。我们调查了:1)宣传活动信息来源的质量;2)质量对结果评估的影响。我们重点关注了三个宣传活动类型:口服脊髓灰质炎疫苗 (OPV)、维生素 A 补充剂 (VAS) 和麻疹疫苗 (MV):这两个国家是几内亚比绍和孟加拉国。我们将来自 HDSS 的活动信息与来自世界卫生组织(WHO)和扶轮基金会(Rotary,仅指 OPV 活动)的信息进行了比较。首先,根据干预类型、活动日期和目标年龄组对活动进行匹配和比较。其次,我们在 Cox 比例危险回归模型中评估了使用不同来源的活动信息对 OPV 活动对 3 岁以下儿童全因死亡率的估计影响。VAS疫苗接种活动(仅有HDSS和WHO提供的信息)的匹配度较低。与 HDSS 相比,Rotary 在开展 OPV 活动方面拥有最好的活动信息,而 WHO 在 OPV 和 VAS 方面的活动信息质量较低。运动信息质量低可能会改变健康结果评估的结论。可靠、准确的活动信息对于评估活动效果至关重要。公共和私营运动的利益相关者应仔细跟踪运动信息,并支持向研究人员提供公开数据。
The importance of quality of health campaign information for outcome evaluation. A case study from Guinea-Bissau and Bangladesh
Background
Numerous national health intervention campaigns, e.g. supplementary immunization campaigns/activities (SIAs), have been conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) in the last decades. These campaigns are rarely evaluated for overall health outcomes. Information on campaigns is critical for evaluations. We investigated; 1) quality of campaign information sources and 2) implication of quality for outcome evaluations.
Methods
We focused on three campaign types: oral polio vaccine (OPV), vitamin A supplementation (VAS) and measles vaccine (MV) campaigns in two case countries, for which “gold standard” information on campaigns collected regularly at Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSS) sites: Guinea-Bissau and Bangladesh. We compared the campaign information from HDSS with information from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Rotary Foundation (Rotary, only OPV campaigns). First, campaigns were matched and compared based on intervention type, date of campaign and target age group. Second, we assessed the implications of using various sources of campaign information on the estimated effect of OPV campaigns on all-cause under-3-year mortality in Cox proportional hazards regression models.
Results
The proportion of matched OPV campaigns was highest between HDSS and Rotary. VAS campaigns (only information from HDSS and WHO) matched poorly. The estimated effect of OPV campaigns information on child mortality in Bangladesh went from being statistically significant (HR = 0.69 (0.52–0.90)) using HDSS campaign information to not being significant (HR = 0.93 (0.71–1.21) using WHO campaign information.
Conclusion
Compared with the HDSS, Rotary had the best campaign information on the conduct of OPV campaigns, whereas the WHO quality of campaign information was low for both OPV and VAS. A low quality of campaign information may alter conclusions of health outcome evaluations. Reliable and precise information on campaigns is essential to assess their effects. Public and private campaign stakeholders should track campaign information meticulously and support that publicly data is available for researchers.