Compelling, credible, recent, direct impact data
Time to read
less than
1 minute
Read so far

Community Outreach - Routine Immunization Increased: 54% mean proportion


Strategy researched

Arm B - additional interventions with community outreach and mobilisation; Arm C all interventions of arm B with additional provision of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) delivered at the maternal and child health camps

Impact achieved

54% mean proportion of routine vaccine doses received in Arm C (43% in Arm A & 52% in Arm B).

Country of study

Conflict-affected areas of Pakistan

Research methodology

Cluster RCT - 387 clusters, 28,760 children


The Lancet; 2017

Journal paper title and link

Community engagement and integrated health and polio immunisation campaigns in conflict-affected areas of Pakistan: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Excerpt from Abstract

"Between June 4, 2013, and May 31, 2014, 387 clusters were randomised (131 to arm A, 127 to arm B, and 129 to arm C). At baseline, 28 760 children younger than 5 years were recorded in arm A, 30 098 in arm B, and 29 126 in arm C. 359 clusters remained in the trial until the end (116 in arm A, 120 in arm B, and 123 in arm C; with 23 334 children younger than 5 years in arm A, 26 110 in arm B, and 25 745 in arm C). The estimated OPV coverage was 75% in arm A compared with 82% in arm B (difference vs arm A 6·6%; 95% CI 4·8–8·3) and 84% in arm C (8·5%, 6·8–10·1; overall p<0·0001). The mean proportion of routine vaccine doses received by children younger than 24 months of age was 43% in arm A, 52% in arm B (9%, 7–11) and 54% in arm C (11%, 9–13; overall p<0·0001). No serious adverse events requiring hospitalisation were reported after immunisation."

Summary at this link


Add new comment

Your Priorities, Opportunities and Challenges? Complete the SURVEY

Why the focus on direct impact data?

A common challenge from policy makers, funders, community members, people directly experiencing development issues, and governments is: Demonstrate your Impact. Prove that what you are doing works. The high quality, highly credible data presented on the cards below is designed to help you answer that question for your social change, behaviour change, community engagement, communication and media for development, strategy formulation, policy engagement and funding initiatives. At this link filter the research data to your specific interests and priorities

Why a playing cards design?

There is a physical pack of cards with this data (to get a copy please request through the comment form for any card). The card approach allows for easy identification and selection of relevant direct impact data in any context. For example if talking with a donor and you need to identify proof of impact say "take a look at the 7 of Hearts". Quick access can be provided to high-quality data for many areas of your work – funding, planning, policy, advocacy, community dialogue, training, partner engagement, and more. A card deck is also engaging, easy to use and share, a conversation starter, and a resource - and they are fun and different. So we kept that design for the online images as it can serve similar purposes. 

What are the criteria for inclusion?

The impact data presented meets the following high standard for inclusion criteria:

  • Positive change or trend in a priority development issue;
  • Social change or behaviour change strategy or process;
  • Randomized Control Trial or Systematic Review methodology;
  • High quality peer review journal published;
  • Numeric impact data point
  • Published since 2010.