MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386932894 · doi:10.1186/s12913-023-10029-1

Vaccination coverage in rural Burkina Faso under the effects of COVID-19: evidence from a panel study in eight districts

2023· article· en· W4386932894 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Cooper, Frank Bicaba, Cheick Tiendrebeogo, Alice Bila, Abel Bicaba, Thomas Druetz

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGlobal Affairs CanadaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsVaccinationMedicinePandemicEnvironmental healthPublic healthDemographyLogistic regressionImmunizationPopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PediatricsImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Improving infant immunization completion and promoting equitable vaccination coverage are crucial to reducing global under-5 childhood mortality. Although there have been hypotheses that the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic would decrease the delivery of health services and immunization campaigns in low- and middle-income countries, the available evidence is still inconclusive. We conducted a study in rural Burkina Faso to assess changes in vaccination coverage during the pandemic. A secondary objective was to examine long-term trends in vaccination coverage throughout 2010-2021. METHODS: Using a quasi-experimental approach, we conducted three rounds of surveys (2019, 2020, 2021) in rural Burkina Faso that we pooled with two previous rounds of demographic and household surveys (2010, 2015) to assess trends in vaccination coverage. The study population comprised infants aged 0-13 months from a sample of 325 households randomly selected in eight districts (n = 736). We assessed vaccination coverage by directly observing the infants' vaccination booklet. Effects of the pandemic on infant vaccination completion were analyzed using multi-level logistic regression models with random intercepts at the household and district levels. RESULTS: A total of 736 child-year observations were included in the analysis. The proportion of children with age-appropriate complete vaccination was 69.76% in 2010, 55.38% in 2015, 50.47% in 2019-2020, and 64.75% in 2021. Analyses assessing changes in age-appropriate full-vaccination coverage before and during the pandemic show a significant increase (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.14-2.85). Our models also confirmed the presence of heterogeneity in full vaccination between health administrative districts. The pandemic could have increased inequities in infant vaccination completion between these districts. The analyses suggest no disruption in age-appropriate full vaccination due to COVID-19. Our findings from our sensitivity analyses to examine trends since 2010 did not show any steady trends. CONCLUSION: Our findings in Burkina Faso do not support the predicted detrimental effects of COVID-19 on the immunization schedule for infants in low- and middle-income countries. Analyses comparing 2019 and 2021 show an improvement in age-appropriate full vaccination. Regardless of achieving and sustaining vaccination coverage levels in Burkina Faso, this should remain a priority for health systems and political agendas.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207