MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2208735451 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofu052.1259

1713Interventions to Increase Healthcare Worker Influenza Vaccination: a meta-analysis

2014· article· en· W2208735451 on OpenAlexaff
Reed Siemieniuk, Brenda L. Coleman, Shumona Shafiz, Ahmed Al-Den, Stephen Bornsten, Robert Kean, Allison McGeer, Laura Goodliffe

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandMount Sinai HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionVaccinationCINAHLHealth careMEDLINEInfluenza vaccineMeta-analysisFamily medicineInternal medicineImmunologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Rates of healthcare worker (HCW) influenza vaccination remain suboptimal, however the most effective way to increase uptake is controversial. We conducted a systematic review of the literature of interventions to increase influenza vaccine coverage in HCWs. Methods. An expert librarian searched the following databases to July 9, 2013: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL. References and conference abstracts were also searched. Interventions were classified into 9 categories (see Results). Two reviewers independently extracted data and classified risk of bias. Primary outcomes were 1) reduction in number of unvaccinated HCWs, and 2) interventions that achieved 95% vaccination rates; each at 1 year (early) and 3 ±1 years (late) after intervention implementation. Results. 9193 titles/abstracts were reviewed, and 121 were included (Figure 1). Of 174 comparisons, 78 were low risk of bias (RoB), 30 were moderate RoB, and 66 were high RoB. There were 132 before/after studies, 23 randomized trials, 12 surveys, 7 cohort studies, and 1 case-control study. All interventions were significantly associated with a reduction in unvaccinated HCWs (listed from largest to smallest effect size): condition of service [12 studies; 357,560 HCWs; 93% reduction in unvaccinated HCWs, (95%CI 91-95%); I2 = 99%], vaccine-or-mask [12 studies; 581,926 HCWs; 74% (61-88%); 100%], declination forms [14 studies; 209,290 HCWs; 41% (35–46%); 98%], audit-and-feedback [15 studies; 545,403 HCWs; 35% (29–40%); 99%], increased vaccine access [46 studies; 764,570 HCWs; 32% (27–36%); 100%], role models [18 studies; 204,514 HCWs; 30% (24–36%); 99%], peer-vaccination [7 studies; 120,670 HCWs; 29% (10–45%); 100%], incentives [17 studies; 188,933 HCWs; 28% (21–33%); 99%], and education/promotion only [16 studies; 554,706 HCWs; 11% (7–16%); 99%]. The interventions that achieved 95% HCW vaccination rates were: condition of service (13/13 early; 4/4 late), vaccine-or-mask (3/15 early; 0/2 late), and role models (1/19 early; 1/10 late). Conclusion. All interventions examined increased HCW influenza vaccine uptake to various degrees. However, only condition of service policies appear to result in sustained HCW vaccination rates of >95%. Disclosures. B. Coleman, Sanofi Pasteur: Investigator, Research grant; GSK: Grant Investigator, Research grant; Novartis: Grant Investigator, Research grant A. Mcgeer, Sanofi Pasteur: Grant Investigator and Scientific Advisor, Research grant; GSK: Grant Investigator, Research grant; Novartis: Grant Investigator, Research grant

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207