Improving vaccination uptake in pediatric Cochlear implant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An Infectious Disease vaccine specialist joined our institution's Cochlear Implant Team in 2010 in order to address the high percentage of non-compliance to immunization prior to surgery identified previously from an internal review. The purpose of this study was to (1) review the immunization status of cochlear implant recipients in 2010-2014, (2) assess if introducing a vaccine specialist made a significant change in vaccination compliance and (3) elucidate any barriers to vaccination compliance. METHODS: Retrospective chart review and a telephone survey. Medical records of 116 cochlear implant recipients between 2010 and 2014 were reviewed. A telephone survey was conducted to obtain the current vaccination status in children who required post-operative vaccinations with incomplete records on chart review and, if applicable, the reason for non-compliance. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2014, 98% of children were up-to-date at the time of surgery, compared to 67% up-to-date at the time of surgery between 2002 and 2007. 27 children were included in our post-operative immunization analysis. 29.6% (8/27) failed to receive necessary vaccinations post-surgery. Pneumovax-23, a vaccine for high-risk patients (such as cochlear implant candidates) was missed in all cases. CONCLUSION: Pre-operative vaccination for cochlear implant recipients improved dramatically with the addition of a vaccine specialist. However, a significant proportion of patients requiring vaccinations post-surgery did not receive them. The main reason for non-compliance was due to parents being unaware that their children required this vaccine postoperatively by being "high-risk". Although improvement was demonstrated, a communication gap continued to impede the adequacy of vaccination uptake in pediatric cochlear implant recipients following surgery at age 2 when the high-risk vaccine was due.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".