Back

Impact of armed conflict on measles surveillance and zero-dose vaccination status in Tigray, Ethiopia, 2018 - 2024

Wolde, H. M.; Bae, Y.; Raza, A.; Lee, S. W.

2026-02-01 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.01.29.26345160 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundArmed conflict disrupts health systems, undermining routine immunization and disease surveillance. These disruptions can delay outbreak detection and allow population susceptibility to accumulate unnoticed. This study assessed the impact of the 2020 - 2022 conflict in Tigray, Ethiopia, on measles epidemiology, focusing on surveillance reporting, age distribution of cases, and vaccination status. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective longitudinal analysis of national case-based measles surveillance data from Ethiopia (2018-2024; n = 69,866). The study period was classified into pre-conflict (2018 - 2019), conflict peak (2020 - 2022), and post-conflict recovery (2023 - 2024) phases. Two-way analysis of variance examined regional differences in age at infection across phases. Multivariable logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for confirmed measles cases being unvaccinated (zero-dose), using the pre-conflict period as the reference and adjusting for age and sex. Surveillance quality was assessed using demographic data completeness. ResultsDuring the conflict peak, reported measles cases from Tigray declined to 0.01% of nationally reported cases, consistent with near-total surveillance collapse. After hostilities ended, a marked pediatric shift emerged, with the median age of infection in Tigray declining from 24.0 years during the conflict to 5.0 years in the post-conflict period (p < 0.0001), a pattern not observed in other regions. Compared with the pre-conflict baseline, the odds that a confirmed measles case was zero-dose were substantially higher during the conflict peak (aOR: 71.43; 95% CI: 14.1 - 1000.0) and remained elevated during post-conflict recovery (aOR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.17 - 5.52). During the conflict peak, 50% of confirmed cases in Tigray lacked sex-disaggregated data. ConclusionThe conflict in Tigray severely disrupted immunization services and surveillance, delaying detection of a large susceptible pediatric cohort. These findings underscore the need for age-targeted catch-up vaccination and resilient surveillance systems during post-conflict recovery. Key questionsO_ST_ABSWhat is already known?C_ST_ABSO_LIArmed conflict disrupts routine immunization and increases the risk of measles outbreaks in low- and middle-income countries. C_LIO_LIConflict also weakens disease surveillance systems, which can delay outbreak detection and obscure the true burden of vaccine-preventable diseases. C_LIO_LIMeasles is highly sensitive to disruptions in vaccination coverage and is often among the first diseases to resurge following health system breakdown. C_LI What are the new findings?O_LIDuring the 2020-2022 conflict in Tigray, measles surveillance reporting declined to near zero, despite rising national measles incidence. C_LIO_LIAfter the cessation of hostilities, measles cases in Tigray shifted sharply toward young children, revealing a large cohort of unvaccinated children that had accumulated during the conflict period. C_LIO_LICompared with the pre-conflict period, confirmed measles cases in the post-conflict period had substantially higher odds of being zero-dose, indicating prolonged interruption of routine immunization services. C_LI What do the new findings imply?O_LISurveillance data from conflict-affected settings may substantially underestimate disease burden during periods of active conflict, leading to delayed recognition of outbreaks. C_LIO_LIPost-conflict recovery strategies should prioritize age-stratified catch-up vaccination campaigns targeting children born during conflict periods, rather than relying solely on routine immunization services. C_LIO_LIStrengthening surveillance resilience in fragile and conflict-affected settings is essential to prevent delayed detection of measles and other vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
13.8%
2
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
71 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.6%
3
Vaccine
189 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.6%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 4%
6.1%
5
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.1%
6
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.1%
7
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.7%
8
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
9
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
10
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
11
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.8%
12
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
2.3%
13
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
14
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
15
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
16
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.6%
17
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
18
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.6%
19
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.6%
20
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
21
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
22
Journal of Travel Medicine
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
23
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
24
The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
25
The Lancet
16 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
26
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
27
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
28
The Lancet Regional Health - Americas
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
29
The Lancet Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
30
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%