Socioeconomic Inequalities and Vaccine Uptake

An Umbrella Review Protocol

Bibliographic Data

ID15480342
AuthorsAmber Sacre (0009-0005-1459-1782, Academic Health Science Network North East and North Cumbria, corresponding author), Clare Bambra (0000-0002-1294-6851, Academic Health Science Network North East and North Cumbria), Josephine M Wildman (0000-0001-9669-6708, Academic Health Science Network North East and North Cumbria), Katie Thomson (0000-0002-9614-728X, Newcastle University), Sarah Sowden (0000-0001-9359-3463, Newcastle University), Adam Todd (0000-0003-1496-9341, Newcastle University)
Year2022
Volume19
Issue18
Pages11172-11172
Publication date2022-09-06
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1661-7827 • E-ISSN: 1660-4601
PublisherMultidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3390/ijerph191811172
PMID36141450
OpenAlexW4295064880
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited48

The effectiveness of immunization is widely accepted: it can successfully improve health outcomes by reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with vaccine-preventable diseases. In the era of pandemics, there is a pressing need to identify and understand the factors associated with vaccine uptake amongst different socioeconomic groups. The knowledge generated from research in this area can be used to inform effective interventions aimed at increasing uptake. This umbrella systematic review aims to determine whether there is an association between socioeconomic inequalities and rate of vaccine uptake globally. Specifically, the study aims to determine whether an individual's socioeconomic status, level of education, occupation, (un)-employment, or place of residence affects the uptake rate of routine vaccines. The following databases will be searched from 2011 to the present day: Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane CENTRAL, Science Citation Index (Web of Science), DARE, SCOPUS (Elsevier), and ASSIA (ProQuest). Systematic reviews will be either included or excluded based on a priori established eligibility criteria. The relevant data will then be extracted, quality appraised, and narratively synthesised. The synthesis will be guided by the theoretical framework developed for this review. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Equity extension (PRISMA-E) guidance will be followed. This protocol has been registered on PROSPERO, ID: CRD42022334223

Alternative medicine · CINAHL · Environmental health · Family medicine · MEDLINE · Political science · Population · Protocol (science · Psychological intervention · Scopus · Socioeconomic status · Systematic review · COVID-19 epidemiological studies · Medicine · Nursing · Public Health Policies and Education · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy