Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34449809›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Livestock vaccination programme participation among smallholder farmers on the outskirts of National Parks and Tiger Reserves in the Indian states of Madhya Pradesh and Assam.

Andy Hopker, Naveen Pandey, Rosie Bartholomew, Abigail Blanton, Sophie Hopker, Aniruddha Dhamorikar, Jadumoni Goswami, Rebecca Marsland, Prakash Metha, Neil Sargison

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Molecular characterization ofVeterinary and animal science · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Global vaccination coverage and disease incidence in cattle, pigs, and poultry.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy in Vietnamese Fish Farmers.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andy HopkerRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush Veterinary Centre, University of Edinburgh, Roslin, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5479-5430
Naveen PandeyThe Corbett Foundation, Kaziranga Office, District Golaghat, Assam, India.ORCID 0000-0002-9498-2310
Rosie BartholomewRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush Veterinary Centre, University of Edinburgh, Roslin, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Abigail BlantonRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush Veterinary Centre, University of Edinburgh, Roslin, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Sophie HopkerRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush Veterinary Centre, University of Edinburgh, Roslin, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Aniruddha DhamorikarThe Corbett Foundation, Kaziranga Office, District Golaghat, Assam, India.
Jadumoni GoswamiThe Corbett Foundation, Kaziranga Office, District Golaghat, Assam, India.
Rebecca MarslandSchool of Social and Political Sciences, University of Edinburgh, George Square, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Prakash MethaThe Corbett Foundation, Kaziranga Office, District Golaghat, Assam, India.
Neil SargisonRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush Veterinary Centre, University of Edinburgh, Roslin, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom.
University of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective livestock vaccination has the potential to raise prosperity and food security for the rural poor in low and middle income countries. To understand factors affecting access to vaccination services, and guide future policy, smallholder farmers in three locations in India were questioned about vaccination of their cattle and buffalo, with particular reference to foot and mouth disease (FMD), haemorrhagic septicaemia (HS) and blackquarter (BQ). In the three regions 51%, 50%, and 31% of respondents reported vaccinating their livestock; well below any threshold for effective population level disease control. However, within the third region, 65% of respondents in villages immediately surrounding the Kaziranga National Park reported vaccinating their cattle. The majority of respondents in all three regions were aware of FMD and HS, awareness of BQ was high in the Kanha and Bandhavgarh regions, but much lower in the Kaziranga region. The majority of respondents had positive attitudes to vaccination; understood vaccination protected their animals from specific diseases; and wished to immunise their livestock. There was no significant association between the age or gender of respondent and the immunisation of their livestock. Common barriers to immunisation were: negative attitudes to vaccination; lack of awareness of date and time of vaccination events; and difficulty presenting animals. Poor access to vaccination services was significantly associated with not vaccinating livestock. Fear of adverse reactions to vaccines was not significantly associated with not vaccinating livestock. Respondents who reported that vets or animal health workers (AHWs) were their main source of animal health knowledge were significantly more likely to have immunised their livestock in the last twelve months. Participants cited poor communication from vaccinators as problematic, both in publicising immunisation programmes, and explaining the purpose of vaccination. Where vaccinations were provided free of charge, farmers commonly displayed passive attitudes to accessing vaccination services, awaiting organised "immunisation drives" rather than seeking vaccination themselves. Based on these findings the following recommendations are made to improve participation and effectiveness of immunisation programmes. Programmes should be planned to integrate with annual cycles of: disease risk, agricultural activity, seasonal climate, social calendar of villages; and maximise efficiency for vaccinators. Dates and times of immunisation in each village must be well publicised, as respondents frequently reported missing the vaccinators. Relevant farmer education should precede immunisation programmes to mitigate against poor knowledge or negative attitudes. Immunisation drives must properly engage beneficiaries, particularly ensuring that services are accessible to female livestock keepers, and sharing some responsibilities with local farmers. Payment of a small monetary contribution by animal keepers could be considered to encourage responsibility for disease prevention, making vaccination an active process by farmers.

Indexed as

LivestockVaccinationAnimal HusbandryAnimalsCattleCattle DiseasesFarmersFemaleFoot-and-Mouth DiseaseHumansImmunization ProgramsIndiaMale

Identifiers

PMID34449809
PMCPMC8396743
OpenAlexW3195683641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.