Assessment of peste des petits ruminant’s vaccine wastage along the vaccine supply chain in Mali
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was carried out in six regions of Mali to assess peste des petits ruminants (PPR) vaccine wastage along the vaccine supply chain during the vaccination campaign of 2023. Multi-stage stratified sampling was used to select 107 actors involved in the vaccine supply chain, including private veterinarians ( n = 75), public vaccinators ( n = 19), regional veterinary officers ( n = 12), and one senior veterinary officer at the central level. Vaccine actors operated across the dominant small ruminants (SR) production systems in Mali (pastoral, agropastoral, and peri-urban). The World Health Organization field guidelines for monitoring and reducing vaccine wastage was used as a basis for this study. Results show that a quarter of vaccine doses were wasted. The vaccine wastage rate was 24.3% in public sector and 25.4% in private sector with approximately 90% of wastage occurring at the final stage of delivery (veterinary posts, or private veterinarians). At upstream points in the vaccine supply chain, wastage was low in both private and public distribution channels (less than 1%). No statistically significant difference was observed between the public and private sectors in vaccine wastage rates across the different stages of the vaccine distribution chain. The biggest cause of wastage was vaccine being discarded due to denaturation (46.0 and 32.4%, respectively, for the private and public actors), as doses were not used within the short (1 h) time window between reconstitution in the field and use. Also wastage was high due to improper injection (33.8 and 45.6% in public and private sectors), vial breakage (11.2 and 11.1%), and reconstitution errors (7.4 and 8.8%). The massive loss due to denaturation highlights the need for building stronger cold chains along the vaccine supply chain. In hard to reach areas, where cold chain failure is more likely, a vaccine able to remain potent for a longer period before and after reconstitution such as thermotolerant vaccines would add value. Furthermore, capacity of field vaccinators should be enhanced through trainings on best practices regarding vaccination.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".