MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101784777

Influenza vaccination in Alberta long-term care facilities.

2001· article· en· W2101784777 on OpenAlexaffabout
M.L. Russell

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaccinationMedicineImmunizationFamily medicineLong-term careImmunization programEnvironmental healthMedical emergencyNursingImmunology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommends that both staff and residents of long-term care facilities be vaccinated against influenza. This paper describes the influenza vaccination policies and programs, as well as vaccination rates, for staff and residents of long-term care institutions in Alberta. Such data have not previously been reported. METHODS: Data were collected by means of an anonymous mail survey (with 2 reminders) sent to Alberta nursing homes and auxiliary hospitals in spring 1999. RESULTS: Of 160 facilities providing long-term care during the study period, 136 responded to the survey (85%). Of these, only 85 provided data on staff vaccination rates, whereas 118 provided data on resident vaccination rates. For institutions reporting this information, the median proportion of staff vaccinated was 29.9% and the median proportion of residents vaccinated was 91.0%. Only 2 facilities reported that staff vaccination was mandatory; however, only one of these had a written policy consistent with the self-report period. Using a travelling vaccination cart, offering vaccination on night shift, and monitoring and providing feedback about staff vaccination rates were infrequently employed as elements of staff vaccination programs, although all were positively correlated with staff vaccination rates. Standing orders for resident vaccination were reported by only 84 facilities. Fourteen institutions required written consent for vaccination from the resident or a relative. Facility requirements for consent to vaccinate from the resident or a relative were significantly associated with mean vaccine coverage: 90.5% coverage for institutions requiring verbal consent, 86.5% coverage for institutions requiring written consent and 95.0% for institutions not requiring written or verbal consent. INTERPRETATION: Staff vaccination rates in Alberta long-term care facilities are unacceptably low. Changes in staff vaccination programs may improve the situation even in the absence of mandatory vaccination or work exclusion rules. Requirements for written consent for vaccination of residents of long-term care facilities may be a barrier to immunization.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207