Rxivist logo

Coverage and timeliness of vaccination and the validity of routine estimates: Insights from a Vaccine Registry in Kenya

By Ifedayo M O Adetifa, Boniface Karia, Alex Mutuku, Tahreni Bwanaali, Anne Makumi, Jackline Wafula, Martina Chome, Pauline Mwatsuma, Evasius Bauni, Laura L. Hammitt, Christine Mataza, Collins Tabu, Tatu Kamau, Thomas N. William, J. Anthony G. Scott

Posted 02 Oct 2018
bioRxiv DOI: 10.1101/427773 (published DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.11.005)

The benefits of childhood vaccines are critically dependent on vaccination coverage. We used a vaccine registry (as gold standard) in Kenya to quantify errors in routine coverage methods (surveys and administrative reports), to estimate the magnitude of survivor bias, contrast coverage with timeliness and use both measures to estimate population immunity. We found coverage surveys in the 2nd year of life overestimate coverage by 2%. Compared to mean coverage in infants, static coverage at 12 months was exaggerated by 7-8% for third doses of oral polio, pentavalent (Penta3) and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines, and by 24% for the measles vaccine. Surveys and administrative coverage also underestimated the proportion of the fully immunised child by 10-14%. For BCG, Penta3 and measles, timeliness was 23-44% higher in children born in a health facility but 20-37% lower in those who first attended during vaccine stock outs. Coverage surveys in 12-23 month old children overestimate protection by ignoring timeliness, and survivor and recall biases.

Download data

  • Downloaded 454 times
  • Download rankings, all-time:
    • Site-wide: 73,494
    • In epidemiology: 3,241
  • Year to date:
    • Site-wide: 139,420
  • Since beginning of last month:
    • Site-wide: 140,746

Altmetric data

Downloads over time

Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide