MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885539035 · doi:10.3399/bjgpopen18x101599

Influenza vaccination in pregnancy: vaccine uptake, maternal and healthcare providers’ knowledge and attitudes. A quantitative study

2018· article· en· W2885539035 on OpenAlexaff
Tina N. Barrett, Edel McEntee, Richard J. Drew, Fiona O’Reilly, Austin O’Carroll, Aisling O’Shea, Brian Cleary

Bibliographic record

VenueBJGP Open · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society of Microbiologists
FundersIrish College of General Practitioners
KeywordsVaccinationMedicinePregnancyOdds ratioInfluenza vaccineReferralFamily medicineConfidence intervalHealth carePediatricsObstetricsImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Influenza during pregnancy is a potentially life threatening illness. There are limited data on influenza vaccination uptake and determinants of uptake in Irish obstetric populations. Aim To determine the uptake of influenza vaccination during pregnancy; determinants of vaccination uptake; knowledge, attitudes, and concerns of postnatal women; and knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals (HCPs) surrounding vaccination. Design & setting A quantitative study of postnatal women attending the Rotunda Hospital, a tertiary referral maternity hospital in Dublin, Ireland. A separate quantitative study conducted by the North Dublin City GP Training Programme surveyed GPs, pharmacists, and Rotunda Hospital clinical staff. Method A paper-based survey was distributed to postnatal women. HCPs completed the survey via the online tool Survey Monkey. Results 330 patient surveys were disseminated, with a 60.0% response rate. Of 198 responders, 109 (55.1%) were vaccinated against influenza. Non-professionals were less likely to be vaccinated (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.09 to 0.89). Vaccination in previous pregnancy (aOR 5.2, 95% CI = 1.69 to 15.62) and information from an HCP were strongly associated with vaccination (aOR 12.8, 95% CI = 2.65 to 62.5). There was a 20.2% (n = 1180) response rate among HCPs. More GPs felt that it was their role to discuss vaccination (92.9%; n = 676), and offer to vaccinate women (91.7%; n = 666) than any other HCP. Conclusion Provision of information about the importance of vaccination against influenza and pertussis during pregnancy by HCPs and their consistent recommendations in support of vaccination were key determinants of vaccine uptake during pregnancy. The sociodemographic determinants of a woman’s vaccination status should be addressed in health promotion campaigns. Education of HCPs may address knowledge gaps surrounding vaccination.

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)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations37
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBJGP OpenSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207