RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Social clustering of unvaccinated children: measles-mumps-rubella vaccination coverage in schools in the Netherlands
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.05.12.22273875
DO 10.1101/2022.05.12.22273875
A1 Klinkenberg, Don
A1 van Hoek, Albert Jan
A1 Veldhuijzen, Irene
A1 Hahné, Susan
A1 Wallinga, Jacco
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/05/14/2022.05.12.22273875.abstract
AB Background For the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, the WHO-recommended coverage for herd protection is 95% for measles and 80% for rubella and mumps. However, a national vaccine coverage does not reflect social clustering of unvaccinated children, e.g. in schools of Orthodox Protestant or Anthroposophic identity in The Netherlands. To fully characterise this clustering, we estimated one-dose MMR vaccination coverages at all schools in the Netherlands.Methods By combining postcode catchment areas of schools and school feeder data, each child in the Netherlands was characterised by residential postcode, primary and secondary school (referred to as school career). Postcode-level vaccination data were used to estimate vaccination coverages per school career. These were translated to coverages per school, stratified by school identity.Results Most schools had vaccine coverages over 99%, but major exceptions were Orthodox Protestant schools (63% in primary and 58% in secondary schools) and Anthroposophic schools (67% and 78%).Conclusions School-level vaccine coverage estimates reveal strong clustering of unvaccinated children. The school feeder data reveal strongly connected Orthodox Protestant and Anthroposophic communities, but separated from one another. This suggests that even at a national one-dose MMR coverage of 97.5%, thousands of children per cohort are not protected by herd immunity.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Centre for Clinical Expertise (CCE) at the RIVM (Netherlands Institute for Public Health and the Environment) is the official body in our Institute, responsible for advice and oversight on human-related research. The CCE assessed the research presented in this paper, and verified whether the work complies with the specific conditions as stated in the law for medical research involving human subjects (WMO). The CCE is of the opinion that the research does not fulfill one or both of these conditions and therefore concludes that it is exempted for further approval by the ethical research committee.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.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesSome data are privacy sensitive because of small numbers and may not automatically be shared. Please contact the authors to explore what is possible.