MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126700321 · doi:10.1370/afm.1405

Interventions to Improve Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccination Rates Among Community-Dwelling Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2012· review· en· W2126700321 on OpenAlexaff
Darren Lau, Jing Hu, Sumit R. Majumdar, Dale Storie, Stephen Edward Rees, Jeffrey Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Family Medicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health EconomicsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationPsychological interventionMeta-analysisOdds ratioInfluenza vaccineOutreachRandomized controlled trialFamily medicineInternal medicineImmunologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates remain below national targets. We systematically reviewed the effectiveness of quality improvement interventions for increasing the rates of influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations among community-dwelling adults. METHODS: We included randomized and nonrandomized studies with a concurrent control group. We estimated pooled odds ratios using random effects models, and used the Downs and Black tool to assess the quality of included studies. RESULTS: Most studies involved elderly primary care patients. Interventions were associated with improvements in the rates of any vaccination (111 comparisons in 77 studies, pooled odds ratio [OR] = 1.61, 95% CI, 1.49-1.75), and influenza (93 comparisons, 65 studies, OR = 1.46, 95% CI, 1.35-1.57) and pneumococcal (58 comparisons, 35 studies, OR = 2.01, 95% CI, 1.72-2.3) vaccinations. Interventions that appeared effective were patient financial incentives (influenza only), audit and feedback (influenza only), clinician reminders, clinician financial incentives (influenza only), team change, patient outreach, delivery site changes (influenza only), clinician education (pneumococcus only), and case management (pneumococcus only). Patient outreach was more effective if personal contact was involved. Team changes were more effective where nurses administered influenza vaccinations independently. Heterogeneity in some pooled odds ratios was high, however, and funnel plots showed signs of potential publication bias. Study quality varied but was not associated with outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Quality improvement interventions, especially those that assign vaccination responsibilities to nonphysician personnel or that activate patients through personal contact, can modestly improve vaccination rates in community-dwelling adults. To meet national policy targets, more-potent interventions should be developed and evaluated.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.033
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.673
GPT teacher head0.566
Teacher spread0.107 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations148
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of Family MedicineSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207