A96 RAPID IMPLEMENTATION OF AN EVIDENCE-BASED, VIRTUAL COVID-19 VACCINE EDUCATION CLINIC AT NOVA SCOTIA COLLABORATIVE INFLAMMATORY DISEASE CLINIC (NSCIBD)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Rapid adaptation of clinical management as well as policy decisions in relation to implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programs for persons living with IBD has been required throughout the pandemic. Aims To meet the need for 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 An observational, cross sectional, implementation-effectiveness study was conducted at the NSCIBD program between April and July, 2021. The educational intervention consisted of a standardized evidence-based letter describing risks and benefits of COVID-19 vaccine emailed to patients in advance of a virtual clinic appointment. Virtual appointments were offered to all patients contacting the NSCIBD program with questions or concerns about vaccination. During these virtual visits standardized, evidence-based information was provided by a gastroenterologist (n=2) or IBD nurse practitioners (n=2) and patients were provided with an opportunity to address specific disease and treatment related concerns. Following the session, a link to an anonymous questionnaire was distributed via email to evaluate key implementation metrics including satisfaction, appropriateness, usefulness, perceived impact on knowledge and vaccine hesitancy, and recommendations for improvement. Data analysis was descriptive. Group means were expressed as proportions for categorical variables and means for numerical variables. Results A total of 298 patients participated in a virtual patient education session of which 265 provided a valid email address and invited to participate in the on-line survey. The response rate was 49% (131/265). Before the session, 48.9% (64/131) expressed vaccine hesitancy. Twenty-six percent (35/131) expressed concerns relating to risks versus benefits of COVID-19 vaccines. Ninety-one percent (119/131) of respondents found the education program helpful. The proportion of those willing to get vaccinated rose from 61% (pre) to 86.3% (post). Only 1.5% (2/131) indicated they would not get vaccinated. Seventy-seven percent (101/131) found the written and virtually administered educational content to be satisfactory. Eighty-eight percent (115/131) of respondents were willing to participate in similar types of virtual education offerings in the future. Conclusions Implementation of an evidence-based, multidisciplinary, virtual COVID-19 vaccination education intervention 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. Funding Agencies None
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 ».