MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403244546 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015671

Understanding the barriers and facilitators related to never treatment during mass drug administration among mobile and migrant populations in Mali: a qualitative exploratory study

2024· article· en· W4403244546 on OpenAlexaff
Moussa Sangare, Abdoul Fatao Diabaté, Yaya Ibrahim Coulibaly, Diadje Tanapo, Sekou Oumarou Thera, Housséini Dolo, Ilo Dicko, Oumar Coulibaly, Binta Sall, Fatoumata Traoré, Seydou Doumbia, Manisha A. Kulkarni, Thomas B. Nutman, Alison Krentel

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersGovernment of the United KingdomBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsQualitative researchExploratory researchAdministration (probate law)MedicinePsychologyGerontologyNursingPolitical scienceSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Five of the neglected tropical diseases use a strategy of preventative chemotherapy distributed via mass drug administration (MDA) for all eligible people living in endemic areas. To be successful, high coverage must be sustained over multiple rounds. Therefore, it will be difficult to reach elimination as a public health problem using MDA if there remain clusters of people who have never been treated. The study aims to explore the reasons why people with high mobility report being never treated during MDA and to provide evidence to support the development of standardised questions for data collection using qualitative research tools. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory study using qualitative methods among displaced people, nomads/transhumants and economic migrants who self-reported that they had never been treated during MDA in the health districts of Tominian and Kalabancoro in Mali. Data were collected through in-depth individual interviews and focus group discussions. Nvivo V.14 software was used for data management and analysis. RESULTS: The main reasons reported for never treatment included: geographical mobility, lack of awareness/information, negative rumours, fear of side effects, conflict and insecurity and logistical difficulties faced in reaching these populations. Proposed solutions included involving communities in the MDA, increasing awareness and information campaigns, effectively managing side effects, and designing and implementing flexible and effective interventions. CONCLUSION: This study highlights that there are people with high mobility who may never have been treated during any round of MDA. The reasons for never treatment highlight the challenges faced when reaching particular groups during MDA activities/interventions. Suggested remedies will require programmes to implement more flexible and tailored interventions. Customised approaches based on the context are essential to guarantee fair access to preventive chemotherapy. Effective interventions must consider the supply and demand side in crafting interventions. This research adds to the evidence base to understand never treatment, particularly among highly mobile population groups and in schistosomiasis elimination programmes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicParasites and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207