MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2761198690 · doi:10.1093/pch/20.5.e78

121: High Adherence with RSV Immunoprophylaxis Dosing Schedule in a Centrally Managed Provincial RSV Program

2015· article· en· W2761198690 on OpenAlexaffabout
Annie Ting Gee Chiu, Rose Paulley, K Sneesby, Joanne Embreé

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDosingMedicinePalivizumabSchedulePediatricsEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Passive immunization against RSV requires monthly doses to maintain adequate serologic levels to prevent RSV-related hospitalization. Up to five IM doses may be provided during the RSV season. Although patients enrolled into a RSV prophylaxis program are already pre-selected because of underlying risk factors, and self-selected by parental agreement to immunoprophylaxis, ensuring adherence to the monthly dosing schedule and the total number of doses remains a challenge. To review the adherence to dosing schedule and number of doses for patients enrolled in a provincial RSV Prophylaxis Program. The Manitoba RSV Prophylaxis Program (MB RSVP) coordinates RSV immunoprophylaxis for all patients in the province of Manitoba. This centralized program manages all aspects of RSV immunoprophylaxis including patient enrolment and medication ordering. One benefit of this centralized program is tracking of doses received and subsequent dose schedule for all enrolled patients. The MB RSVP provides phone calls reminding patients and health care providers (HCP) of upcoming palivizumab doses. Anonymized data for three seasons (2011–14) were analyzed. Adherence was evaluated by number of doses received during the season and by adherence to the dosing schedule. The optimum number of doses a patient should receive was calculated from the date of first dose given to the end of the RSV prophylaxis season. Compliance with dosing schedule is calculated based on the provincial standardized dosing interval of 28 days with exception of 35 days between the fourth and fifth doses. Over the three seasons, 857 paediatric patients received at least one dose of palivizumab. 74.8% of patients received the expected number of doses during the season and 24% received less than expected. Overall, 58.4% of all doses were provided exactly according to schedule. (either exactly at 28 days interval, or exactly at 35 days interval between 4th and 5th doses). 81.1% of doses were given within a ± 3 day window around the scheduled date, 93% within ± 7 day window. Only 13.5% of all doses were given ≥4 days after schedule. Factors impacting adherence included parent or HCP non-compliance, patient death, loss-to-follow-up, relocation outside of province, vacation/travel, repair of cardiac lesion, and withdrawal of consent. A centralized provincial RSV prophylaxis program with central tracking of dosing schedule and regular phone reminder to parents and heath care providers is highly successful in ensuring adherence to both dosing schedule and total number of doses.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicRespiratory viral infections research→French-language works237,207→