Many children in low and middle-income countries remain unvaccinated, and vaccines do not always produce immunity. Extensive research has sought to understand why, but most studies have been limited in breadth and depth. This study documents existing evidence on determinants of vaccination and immunization and presents a conceptual framework of determinants. We used systematic review, content analysis, thematic analysis and interpretive synthesis to document and analyze the existing evidence on determinants of childhood vaccination and immunization. We documented 1609 articles, including content analysis of 78 articles. Three major thematic models were described in the context of one another. Interpretive synthesis identified similarities and differences between studies, resulting in a conceptual framework with three principal vaccine utilization determinants: 1) Intent to Vaccinate, 2) Community Access and 3) Health Facility Readiness. This study presents the most comprehensive systematic review of vaccine determinants to date. The conceptual framework represents a synthesis of multiple existing frameworks, is applicable in low and middle-income countries, and is quantitatively testable. Future researchers can use these results to develop competing conceptual frameworks, or to analyze data in a theoretically-grounded way. This review enables better research in the future, further understanding of immunization determinants, and greater progress against vaccine preventable diseases around the world.

Policy researchers have used various categories of variables to explain why policies change, including those related to institutions, interests and ideas. Recent research has paid growing attention to the role of policy networks—the actors involved in policy-making, their relationships with each other, and the structure formed by those relationships—in policy reform across settings and issues; however, this literature has largely ignored the theoretical integration of networks with other policy theories, including the ‘3Is’ of institutions, interests and ideas. This article proposes a conceptual framework integrating these variables and tests it on three cases of policy change in Burkina Faso, addressing the need for theoretical integration with networks as well as the broader aim of theory-driven health policy analysis research in low- and middle-income countries. We use historical process tracing, a type of comparative case study, to interpret and compare documents and in-depth interview data within and between cases. We found that while network changes were indeed associated with policy reform, this relationship was mediated by one or more of institutions, interests and ideas. In a context of high donor dependency, new donor rules affected the composition and structure of actors in the networks, which enabled the entry and dissemination of new ideas and shifts in the overall balance of interest power ultimately leading to policy change. The case of strategic networking occurred in only one case, by civil society actors, suggesting that network change is rarely the spark that initiates the process towards policy change. This analysis highlights the important role of changes in institutions and ideas to drive policymaking, but hints that network change is a necessary intermediate step in these processes.

Data from the WHO and UNICEF Estimates of National Immunization Coverage (WUENIC) 2022 revision were analyzed to assess the status of routine immunization in the WHO African Region disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2022, coverage for the first and third doses of the diphtheria–tetanus–pertussis-containing vaccine (DTP1 and DTP3, respectively) and the first dose of the measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) in the region was estimated at 80%, 72% and 69%, respectively (all below the 2019 level). Only 13 of the 47 countries (28%) achieved the global target coverage of 90% or above with DTP3 in 2022. From 2019 to 2022, 28.7 million zero-dose children were recorded (19.0% of the target population). Ten countries in the region accounted for 80.3% of all zero-dose children, including the four most populated countries. Reported administrative coverage greater than WUENIC-reported coverage was found in 19 countries, highlighting routine immunization data quality issues. The WHO African Region has not yet recovered from COVID-19 disruptions to routine immunization. It is critical for governments to ensure that processes are in place to prioritize investments for restoring immunization services, catching up on the vaccination of zero-dose and under-vaccinated children and improving data quality.

Background: The importance of immunization for child survival underscores the need to eliminate immunization inequalities. Few existing studies of inequalities use approaches that view the challenges and potential solutions from the perspective of caregivers. This study aimed to identify barriers and context-appropriate solutions by engaging deeply with caregivers, community members, health workers, and other health system actors through participatory action research, intersectionality, and human-centered design lenses. Methods: This study was conducted in the Demographic Republic of Congo, Mozambique and Nigeria. Rapid qualitative research was followed by co-creation workshops with study participants to identify solutions. We analyzed the data using the UNICEF Journey to Health and Immunization Framework. Results: Caregivers of zero-dose and under-immunized children faced multiple intersecting and interacting barriers related to gender, poverty, geographic access, and service experience. Immunization programs were not aligned with needs of the most vulnerable due to the sub-optimal implementation of pro-equity strategies, such as outreach vaccination. Caregivers and communities identified feasible solutions through co-creation workshops and this approach should be used whenever possible to inform local planning. Conclusions: Policymakers and managers can integrate HCD and intersectionality mindsets into existing planning and assessment processes, and focus on overcoming root causes of sub-optimal implementation.

Background Global health partnerships have grown rapidly in number and scope, yet there has been less emphasis on their evaluation. Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, is one such public-private partnership; in Gavi-eligible countries partnerships are dynamic networks of immunization actors who work together to support all stages and aspects of Gavi support. This paper describes a conceptual framework – the partnership framework – and analytic approach for evaluating the perceptions of partnerships’ added value as well as the results from an application to one case in Uganda. Methods We used a mixed-methods case study design embedded in the Gavi Full Country Evaluations (FCE) to test the partnership framework on Uganda’s human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine application partnership. Data from document review, interviews, and social network surveys enabled the testing of the relationships between partnership framework domains (context, structure, practices, performance, and outcomes). Topic guides were based on the framework domains and network surveys identified working together relationships, professional trust, and perceptions of the effectiveness, efficiency, and legitimacy of the partnership’s role in this process. Results Data from seven in-depth interviews, 11 network surveys and document review were analyzed according to the partnership framework, confirming relationships between the framework domains. Trust was an important contributor to the perceived effectiveness of the process. The network was structured around the EPI program, who was considered the leader of this process. While the structure and composition of the network was largely viewed as supporting an effective and legitimate process, the absence of the Ministry of Education (MoE) may have had downstream consequences if this study’s results had not been shared with the Ministry of Health (MoH) and acted upon. The partnership was not perceived to have increased the efficiency of the process, perhaps as a result of unclear or absent guidelines around roles and responsibilities. Conclusion The health and functioning of global health partnerships can be evaluated using the framework and approach presented here. Network theory and methods added value to the conceptual and analytic processes and we recommend applying this approach to other global health partnerships to ensure that they are meeting the complex challenges they were designed to address.

Evidence-informed health policymaking is a goal of equitable and effective health systems but occurs infrequently in reality. Past research points to the facilitating role of interpersonal relationships between policy-makers and researchers, imploring the adoption of a social network lens. This study aims to identify network-level factors associated with the exchange and use of research evidence in policymaking. Data on social networks and research use were collected from seventy policy actors across three health policy cases in Burkina Faso (child health, malaria, and HIV). Networks were graphed for actors’ interactions, their provision of, and request for research evidence. Exponential random graph models estimated the probability of evidence provision and request between actors, controlling for network- and individual-level covariates. Logistic regression models estimated actors’ use of research evidence to inform policy. Network structure explained more than half of the evidence exchanges (ties) observed in these networks. Across all cases, a pair of actors was more likely to form a provision tie if they already had a request tie between them and visa versa (θ = 6.16, p < 0.05; θ = 2.87, p < 0.05; θ = 2.31, p < 0.05). The child health network displayed clustering tendencies, meaning that actors were more likely to form ties if they shared an acquaintance (θ = 2.36, p < 0.05). Actors’ use of research evidence was positively associated with their centrality (i.e., connectedness). The exchange and use of research evidence in policymaking can be partly explained by the structure of actors’ networks of relationships. Efforts to support knowledge translation and evidence-informed policymaking should consider network factors.