ArticlePloS one2026
Vaccine management systems with a focus on cold chain management and delivery of immunization services in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe main objective of this scoping review is to examine the characteristics of vaccine management and delivery systems with a specific focus on cold chain management used for routine immunization in the LMICs, along with factors influencing these systems, challenges faced and the extent of digitization implemented.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for studies published between 2010 and February 2025. Our study selection, data charting, and synthesis followed methodological frameworks outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute and PRISMA guidelines for Scoping Review.
resultOutof 2451 identified studies, 16 eligible studies were included. The findings revealed diverse vaccine management system designs, including centralized and decentralized architecture, interoperable integrated models, and provisions for online and offline accessibility. Core features of these systems included longitudinal health records, automated inventory monitoring, and beneficiary engagement features including digital health cards. Implementation was influenced by global initiatives, project management teams and their capability, and challenges related to digitization. Factors impacting vaccine delivery included immunization sessions, stock management systems, distribution weaknesss, suboptimal practices, training gaps, and documentation. Digital transformations varied across countries, with Vietnam, Tanzania, and Zambia adopting electronic immunization registries, while India implemented the Electronic Vaccine Intelligence Network. The implementation of these digital logistics management information systems significantly improved vaccine management by reducing wastage, enhancing record-keeping, and optimizing supply chain efficiency.
conclusionTo our knowledge, this scoping review is the first to provide empirical evidence on vaccine management and delivery systems and digitization in immunization in the LMICs. This review concludes that LMICs have been adapting various systems including electronic system, digitization, decentralisation of vaccine delivery, stock monitoring, individual tracking to improve immunization. Across countries, some have made notable progress, while others are at their initial stage of implementation. However, this review suggests further studies on integrated vaccine management systems and their impact for inter-country comparison.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.