Cost of Delivering Child Immunization Services in Urban Bangladesh: A\nStudy Based on Facility-level Surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This facility-based study estimated the costs of providing child\nimmunization services in Dhaka, Bangladesh, from the perspective of\nhealthcare providers. About a quarter of all immunization (EPI)\ndelivery sites in Dhaka city were surveyed during 1999. The EPI\nservices in urban Dhaka are delivered through a partnership of the\nGovernment of Bangladesh (GoB) and non-governmental organizations\n(NGOs). About 77% of the EPI delivery sites in Dhaka were under the\nmanagement of NGOs, and 62% of all vaccinations were provided through\nthese sites. The outreach facilities (both GoB and NGO) provided\nimmunization services at a much lower cost than the permanent static\nfacilities. The average cost per measles-vaccinated child (MVC), an\nindirect measure of number of children fully immunized (FIC__the number\nof children immunized by first year of life), was US$ 11.61. If all the\nimmunization doses delivered by the facilities were administered to\nchildren who were supposed to be immunized (FVC), the cost per child\nwould have been US$ 6.91. The wide gap between the cost per MVC and the\ncost per FVC implies that the cost of immunizing children can be\nreduced significantly through better targeting of children. The\nincremental cost of adding new services or interventions with current\nEPI was quite low, not significantly higher than the actual cost of new\nvaccines or drugs to be added. NGOs in Dhaka mobilized about US$ 15,000\nfrom the local community to support the immunization activities.\nInvolving local community with EPI activities not only will improve the\nsustainability of the programme but will also increase the immunization\ncoverage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".