Joint human and animal vaccination strategies to reach mobile pastoralists and their livestock in Africa: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Africa’s pastoralist population is approximately 268 million, which is over a quarter of the continent’s population. They occupy more than 40% of Africa’s land, though density varies by country. Mobile pastoralists are often underreported in national censuses due to political marginalisation and difficulties in counting these groups. Vaccination services delivered through fixed facilities do not adequately reach mobile pastoralists, which impacts vaccination coverage and health outcomes for these mobile groups who are economically and culturally connected to their livestock. This scoping review explored literature on joint human-animal vaccination strategies as a One Health approach to improve vaccination coverage among these mobile pastoralists and their animals. Methods A systematic search was performed across 12 databases, following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and adhering to the PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. Results Of 2469 records screened for eligibility, 17 articles were included in a full-text assessment, and five met the eligibility criteria. The included studies were published between 2004 and 2016. Three studies were conducted in Chad and one each in Nigeria and Somalia. The implementation of the vaccination campaigns was organised in three phases: planning, implementation, and post-vaccination. Key enabling factors were identified in these joint campaigns, including the use of a participatory approach throughout both the planning and implementation phases, with a strong emphasis on intersectoral collaboration and active community engagement in all activities. Interventions were adapted during the campaigns to ensure they were contextually acceptable. The joint human and animal vaccination campaigns increased vaccination coverage among mobile pastoralists compared to baseline levels by targeting children, women of reproductive age, and their animals. Nevertheless, the campaigns highlighted human vaccination results but paid little attention to animal populations, contradicting the values of mobile pastoralists. Conclusions This review offers valuable insights into the design of joint vaccination campaigns tailored for mobile pastoralists and their livestock. Whilst joint vaccination campaigns appear to improve human vaccine uptake, more information is needed to evaluate the potential benefits that could be gained by attention to animal vaccination and improved animal health outcomes, which could further improve non-vaccine-related human health outcomes.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".