Reasons for reductions in routine childhood immunisation uptake during the COVID-19 pandemic in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in a substantial decline in routine immunisation coverage in children globally, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study summarises the reasons for disruptions to routine child immunisations in LMICs. A systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42021286386) was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Six databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, CINAHL, Scopus and MedRxiv, on 11/02/2022. Observational and qualitative studies published from January 2020 onwards were included if exploring reasons for missed immunisations during the COVID-19 pandemic in LMICs. Study appraisal used National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tools. Reasons for disruption were defined with descriptive codes; cross-sectional (quantitative) data were summarised as mean percentages of responses weighted by study population, and qualitative data were summarised narratively. A total of thirteen studies were included describing reasons behind disruptions; 7 cross-sectional (quantitative), 5 qualitative and 1 mixed methods. Seventeen reasons for disruptions were identified. In quantitative studies (total respondents = 2,853), the most common reasons identified were fear of COVID-19 and consequential avoidance of health centres (41.2%, SD ±13.3%), followed by transport challenges preventing both families and healthcare professionals from reaching vaccination services (11.1% SD ±16.6%). Most reasons stemmed from reduced healthcare-seeking (83.4%), as opposed to healthcare-delivery issues (15.2%). Qualitative studies showed a more even balance of healthcare-seeking (49.5%) and healthcare-delivery issues (50.5%), with fear of COVID-19 remaining a major identified issue (total respondents = 92). The most common reasons for disruption were parental fear of COVID-19 and avoidance of health services. Health systems must therefore prioritise public health messaging to encourage vaccine uptake and recovery of missed immunisations.

Barriers and facilitators to the recruitment of disabled people to clinical trials: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Underrepresentation of disabled groups in clinical trials results in an inadequate evidence base for their clinical care, which drives health inequalities. This study aims to review and map the potential barriers and facilitators to the recruitment of disabled people in clinical trials to identify knowledge gaps and areas for further extensive research. The review addresses the question: 'What are the barriers and facilitators to recruitment of disabled people to clinical trials?'. METHODS: The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Scoping review guidelines were followed to complete the current scoping review. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched via Ovid. The literature search was guided by a combination of four key concepts from the research question: (1) disabled populations, (2) patient recruitment, (3) barriers and facilitators, and (4) clinical trials. Papers discussing barriers and facilitators of all types were included. Papers that did not have at least one disabled group as their population were excluded. Data on study characteristics and identified barriers and facilitators were extracted. Identified barriers and facilitators were then synthesised according to common themes. RESULTS: The review included 56 eligible papers. The evidence on barriers and facilitators was largely sourced from Short Communications from Researcher Perspectives (N = 22) and Primary Quantitative Research (N = 17). Carer perspectives were rarely represented in articles. The most common disability types for the population of interest in the literature were neurological and psychiatric disabilities. A total of five emergent themes were determined across the barriers and facilitators. These were as follows: risk vs benefit assessment, design and management of recruitment protocol, balancing internal and external validity considerations, consent and ethics, and systemic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Both barriers and facilitators were often highly specific to disability type and context. Assumptions should be minimised, and study design should prioritise principles of co-design and be informed by a data-driven assessment of needs for the study population. Person-centred approaches to consent that empower disabled people to exercise their right to choose should be adopted in inclusive practice. Implementing these recommendations stands to improve inclusive practices in clinical trial research, serving to produce a well-rounded and comprehensive evidence base.

The use of imagery in global health: an analysis of infectious disease documents and a framework to guide practice.

We report an empirical analysis of the use of imagery by the key actors in global health who set policy and strategy, and we provide a comprehensive overview, particularly related to images used in reports on vaccination and antimicrobial resistance. The narrative currently depicted in imagery is one of power imbalances, depicting women and children from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) with less dignity, respect, and power than those from high-income countries. The absence of any evidence of consent for using intrusive and out-of-context images, particularly of children in LMICs, is concerning. The framework we have developed provides a platform for global health actors to redefine their intentions and recommission appropriate images that are relevant to the topic, respect the integrity of all individuals depicted, are accompanied by evidence of consent, and are equitable in representation. Adhering to these standards will help to avoid inherent biases that lead to insensitive content and misrepresentation, stigmatisation, and racial stereotyping.