Table 4. Outcomes and methods for measurement.
| Author and publication year | Vaccination coverage achieveda (%) | Method for estimating vaccination coverage | Sterilis-ation coverageb (%) | Method for estimating sterilisation coverage | Issues that may have impacted estimates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Byrnes et al (2017) [30] | 18–85b | Vaccination numbers and dog population estimates | NR | n/a | Feral dogs in forests were excluded |
| Hasler et al (2014) [31] | NR | n/a | NR | n/a | |
| Kamoltham et al (2003) [32] | 71g | NR–unclear if calculated from vaccination numbers or reported vaccinated by owner | NR | n/a | |
| Reece and Chawla [2006] (33) | 35.5 | Direct count during population surveys | 65.7 females and 5.8 males | Direct count during population surveys | Vaccination coverage likely low estimate as based on ear-notched dogs (i.e. dogs that were also sterilised) only. |
| Reece et al (2013) [23] | NR | n/a | 70–80 females | Direct counts along defined routes | NR |
| Totton et al (2010) [34] | 61.8–86.5b | Proportion of notched dogs observed by marking team in each area | 61.8–86.5b | Proportion of notched dogs observed by marking team in each area | Chained, leashed, confined, and/or collared dogs and puppies (<3m) were not included in population size counts |
| Lee (2011) [35] | 89c | Household survey of dog owners | 64c, >80 community/unowned dogs | Household survey for owned dogs, NR for community/unowned dogs | |
| WSPA (2010) [36] | 80 | NR | NR | n/a | |
| Belotto (1988) [37] | 88.2 | NR | n/a | n/a | |
| Chomel et al (1988) [38] | 78d | Vaccination numbers and household survey | n/a | n/a | |
| Cleaveland et al (2003) [39] | 67.8f | Household survey e | n/a | n/a | |
| Lechenne et al (2016) [40] | 71 | Household survey and post vaccination transects. Bayesian statistical model | n/a | n/a | Vaccination coverage was the mean over all districts covered but coverage in each district varied |
| Mpolya et al (2017) [41] | 65 | Post-vaccination transects from 2013–15 | n/a | n/a | Actual vaccination coverage likely lower as transects tended to miss young pups and campaigns not completed in every village |
| Mudoga et al (2014) [44] | 70c | NR | NR | n/a | References a baseline dog population survey but NR in this study |
| Le Roux et al (2018) [42] | NR | Census in 2 villages but data NR | NR | n/a | |
| Valenzuela et al (2017) [43] | 47.6 | Dog censuses | n/a | n/a | Vaccination coverage data was not routinely collected as part of the vaccination campaign and therefore only indirectly assessed |
| 24.3 | Household survey | ||||
| 13.1 | Household surveys and dog counts corrected for incomplete detectability |
NR–not reported
n/a–not applicable
a end of study NR–not reported
b reported by region or area
c owned dogs only
d includes 13% vaccinated by private vets
e average coverage over the 4 campaigns
f coverage was also estimated for the first campaign using post vaccination transects and number of vaccine doses administered in relation to estimated dog population.
g total over 6 campaigns