1. Comparison between this review and other reviews on related topics.
| Review citation | Focus of cited review | Comparison with our review |
| Briss 2000 | This review considers the effects of population‐based interventions to improve vaccination coverage in children, adolescents and adults | Briss 2000 only includes studies from industrialised settings and studies published up to 1997, although it includes a wider scope of interventions than our review. Our review includes studies conducted in any setting and focusing on children, and updates findings from the Briss review for this range of interventions |
| Grilli 2002 | This review assesses the effect of mass media intervention on the utilisation of health services. 20 studies were included in the review; 2 were relevant to vaccination | Our review only includes mass media interventions focused on vaccination and not those focusing on other health services or issues Grilli 2002 has not been updated since 2001 |
| Stone 2002 | This review assesses the effects of interventions to increase the use of adult immunisation | Our review focuses on immunisation in children only |
| Maglione 2002 | This reviews assesses the effects of mass mailings designed to increase utilisation of influenza vaccine among Medicare beneficiaries in the USA | Our review focuses on immunisation in children only |
| Jacobson 2005 | This review assesses the effectiveness of patient reminder and recall systems to improve immunisation rates, and compares the effects of various types of reminders in different settings or patient populations | Our review excludes reminder and recall systems where there is no information and/or education component or purpose |
| Lewin 2010 | This review assesses the effects of lay health worker interventions on maternal and child health and the management of infectious diseases. 82 trials are included in the review; 8 are potentially relevant to vaccination. 7 of these deal with childhood vaccination | Our review is not limited to interventions delivered by lay health workers. Any childhood immunisation interventions included in the Lewin 2010 review and that were also aimed at communities were considered for inclusion in this review |
| Glenton 2011 | This review assesses the effects of lay health worker interventions on the uptake of childhood immunisation and develops a typology of intervention models | Our review is not limited to lay health worker interventions |
| Oyo‐Ita 2011 | This review evaluates the effectiveness of strategies to increase childhood vaccination rates in low‐ and middle‐income countries. 6 studies are included in the review. 4 involve some form of communication with parents or communities | This review only includes studies conducted in low‐ and middle‐income countries. Our review includes studies conducted in any location |
|
Williams 2011 |
This review assesses the effectiveness of strategies to improve childhood immunisation uptake in primary care settings in developed countries. Strategies may be directed to consumers or practitioners and include remind or recall interventions, education, parent‐held records and feedback | The studies included in this review were conducted in high‐income countries only and in primary care settings, while the scope of our review includes all locations and settings |
| Cairns 2012 | This review examined evidence on the effectiveness of European promotional communications for national immunisation schedule vaccinations. The review aimed to: describe the types of promotional communication that have been used; assess the quality of the evaluations these promotional communication interventions; and assess the applicability of this evidence to immunisation policy, strategy and practice priorities in Europe | Cairns 2012 considered immunisation in adults, adolescents and children and included studies conducted in a European country and evaluating a promotional communication intervention. Our review focuses on community‐directed interventions to inform or educate about childhood vaccination only and also includes studies from any setting. None of the studies in Cairns 2012 that focused on childhood vaccination and evaluated interventions aimed at communities were eligible for inclusion in our review |
| Kaufman 2013 | A companion COMMVAC review focused on face‐to‐face interventions directed at parents | Our review includes interventions which target community members (the general public), including, for example, parents and other caregivers and family members of young children, community leaders, teachers, health personnel (as part of a wider community intervention), and other influential community members We excluded interventions that targeted individuals directly and were not aimed at communities ‐ these interventions are considered in the Kaufman review |
| Sadaf 2013 | This review assessed the evidence on interventions to decrease parental vaccine refusal and hesitancy toward recommended childhood and adolescent vaccines | Sadaf 2013 includes a wider scope of interventions and study designs than our review and also included interventions focused on adolescents and young adults. The review does not specifically address the effects of interventions aimed at communities and does not include any studies that were eligible for inclusion in our review |
| Dubé 2013 | This review considers the possible causes of vaccine hesitancy in low‐ and middle‐income countries and the determinants of individual decision‐making about vaccination | This review did not focus on the effects of interventions to inform or educate about early childhood vaccination |
| Larson 2014 | This review aimed to: 1) identify research on vaccine hesitancy; 2) identify determinants of vaccine hesitancy in different settings; and 3) inform the development of a model for assessing determinants of vaccine hesitancy in different settings | This review did not focus on the effects of interventions to inform or educate about early childhood vaccination |