MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Feasibility and utility of influenza vaccination in hematology/oncology clinics.

2013· article· en· W2589626476 on OpenAlexaffabout
Navjeet Uppal, Swanee Tobin, Jennifer Cape, Matthew Muller, Lisa K. Hicks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationHematologyInternal medicineCancerInfluenza vaccineFamily medicinePediatricsImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

166 Background: Seasonal influenza vaccination is recommended for cancer patients. However, many cancer clinics do not routinely offer flu shots. Early in January, 2013, Toronto experienced widespread influenza activity. Approximately 25% of hospitalizations on the hematology/oncology ward at St. Michael's Hospital (SMH) during this time were for suspected influenza. A large number of patients were noted to be unvaccinated. In-response, influenza vaccination was organized in parallel with regular hematology/oncology clinics at SMH. Aims: To determine the feasibility and utility of influenza vaccination in a cancer clinic. Methods: All patients seen in the SMH hematology/oncology clinic between January 14 and February 1, 2013, were eligible for influenza vaccination. A brief survey was administered to obtain vaccination history, willingness to receive flu vaccination, and beliefs about flu vaccination. Information regarding diagnosis, treatment, and family physician was obtained from the medical record. Univariate testing was completed with the Chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests as appropriate. Results: 555 patients were seen during the period of interest; 206 completed the survey (37% response rate). Median age of respondents was 63 years, 42% were male, and 81% had cancer. 107(52%) of respondents had not received seasonal influenza vaccination of whom 41 (38%) accepted vaccination when offered. Among vaccinated patients, most received the flu shot from a family physician (70%). Reasons for not receiving the flu shot were personal preference (24%), belief that it was not necessary (19%), inconvenience (14%), concerns about side effects (8%), believe that it was contraindicated during chemotherapy (7%) and a perception that a medical practitioner advised against it (7%). Patients without a registered family physician were less likely to have received the seasonal flu shot (p=0.03). Patients with a malignant diagnosis and patients receiving IV chemotherapy tended to have lower rates of seasonal flu vaccination (p=0.09 and p=0.12 respectively). Conclusions: Administering influenza vaccination during hematology/oncology clinics is feasible and may address a care gap in this population.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.321
GPT teacher head0.586
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→