P387 Rapid Implementation of an Evidence-Based, Virtual COVID-19 Vaccine Education Clinic at the Nova Scotia Collaborative Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinic (NSCIBD) Program
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background The COVID-19 global pandemic has been associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Rapid adaptation of approaches to clinical management as well as policy decisions in relation to implementation of vaccination programs for persons living with IBD has been required throughout the pandemic. To meet the sudden demand of large scale public health-mandated COVID-19 vaccine education for patients living with IBD in Nova Scotia a novel, evidence-based, virtual COVID-19 vaccine educational intervention was developed, implemented, and evaluated. Methods This was a prospective, observational, cross sectional, implementation-effectiveness study conducted at the NSCIBD program between April-July, 2021. The educational intervention consisted of a standardized email outlining evidence relating to risks and benefits of COVID-19 vaccinations. The intervention was offered to all patients contacting the NSCIBD program with questions or concerns about the vaccine. During one-on-one virtual visits, standardized and evidence-based information was provided by a gastroenterologist or IBD nurse practitioner. Following the session, an anonymous questionnaire (NoviSurvey) evaluated key implementation metrics including satisfaction, appropriateness, usefulness, perceived impact on knowledge and vaccine hesitancy, willingness to participate in future sessions, and recommendations for improvement. Descriptive analyses were conducted, with group means expressed as proportions for categorical variables and means for numerical variables. Results A total of, 265 patients were invited to participate in the online survey, with a response rate of, 49% (131/265). Before the session, 48.9% (64/131) expressed COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and, 26% (35/131) expressed concerns relating to risks versus benefits of COVID-19 vaccines. Ninety-one percent (119/131) of respondents found the education program to be helpful and, 92% (121/131) indicated there was no information perceived to be lacking from the session. Following the intervention, the proportion of those willing to get vaccinated rose from, 61% to, 86.3%. Only, 1.5% (2/131) indicated that they would likely not get vaccinated. Most participants (77%, 101/131) found the written and virtually administered educational content to be satisfactory and, 88% (115/131) were willing to participate in similar virtual education offerings in the future. Conclusion Implementation of an evidence-based, multidisciplinary COVID-19 vaccination education intervention delivered using a virtual platform was perceived to be feasible, acceptable, and effective by IBD patients. Further research on innovative, evidence-based, multidisciplinary educational interventions and the impact of these interventions on IBD clinical outcomes are needed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».