Abstract
Background Evidence to date has shown that inequality in health, and vaccine coverage in particular, can have ramifications to wider society. However, whilst individual studies have sought to characterise these heterogeneities in immunisation coverage at national level, few have taken a broad and quantitative view of the contributing factors to heterogeneity in vaccine coverage and impact. This systematic review aims to highlight these geographic, demographic, and sociodemographic characteristics through a qualitative and quantitative approach, vital to prioritise and optimise vaccination policies.
Methods A systematic review of two databases (PubMed and Web of Science) was undertaken using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and keywords to identify studies examining factors on vaccine inequality and heterogeneity in vaccine coverage. Inclusion criteria were applied independently by two researchers. Studies including data on key characteristics of interest were further analysed through a meta-analysis to produce a pooled estimate of the risk ratio using a random effects model for that characteristic.
Results One hundred and eight studies were included in this review. We found that inequalities in wealth, education, and geographic access can affect vaccine impact and vaccine dropout. We estimated those living in rural areas were not significantly different in terms of full vaccination status compared to urban areas but noted considerable heterogeneity between countries. We found that females were 3% (95%CI[1%, 5%]) less likely to be fully vaccinated than males. Additionally, we estimated that children whose mothers had no formal education were 28% (95%CI[18%,47%]) less likely to be fully vaccinated than those whose mother had primary level, or above, education. Finally, we found that individuals in the poorest wealth quintile were 27% (95%CI [16%,37%]) less likely to be fully vaccinated than those in the richest.
Conclusions We found a nuanced picture of inequality in vaccine coverage and access with wealth disparity dominating, and likely driving, other disparities. This review highlights the complex landscape of inequity and further need to design vaccination strategies targeting missed subgroups to improve and recover vaccination coverage following the COVID-19 pandemic.
Registration Prospero CRD42021261927
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was carried out as part of the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium (VIMC, www.vaccineimpact.org). VIMC is jointly funded by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and by the Bill Melinda Gates Foundation. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Consortium or its funders. The funders were given the opportunity to review this paper prior to publication, but the final decision on the content of the publication was taken by the authors. Consortium members received funding from Gavi and BMGF via VIMC during the course of the study. This work was supported, in whole or in part, by the Bill Melinda Gates Foundation, via the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium (Grant Number OPP1157270 / INV-009125). AMH, SEL, JR, XL, KW, NMF, JT, KAMG also acknowledge funding from the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis (reference MR/R015600/1), jointly funded by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth Development Office (FCDO), under the MRC/FCDO Concordat agreement and is also part of the EDCTP2 programme supported by the European Union; and acknowledge funding by Community Jameel.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
N/A
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data and code are available from https://github.com/mrcide/vaccinequity_litreview.
List of abbreviations
- Glossary
- DTP
- Diptheria, tetanus and polio (sometimes shown as DPT). 2
- EPI
- Expanded Programme on Immunisation. 16
- HIC
- High income country. 22
- LMIC
- Low or middle income country. 2
- OPV
- Oral polio vaccine. 12
- SDG
- Sustainable development goals. 2