Tetanus vaccination status in construction workers: results from an institutional surveillance campaign.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since 1963 Italian law (Law 292/1963, Legislative Decree n.81/2008), defines Tetanus Vaccination (TeV) as mandatory for defined occupational categories, including Construction Workers (CWs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An institutional survey on of CWs was performed in the Autonomous Province of Trento (Oct. 2016 - Apr. 2017). Vaccination booklets/certificate were retrieved recalling: TeV status (1), and TeV settings (2), i.e. basal schedule; year of last shot, healthcare providers who performed TeV, and TeV formulate(s). RESULTS: Data about 205 CWs were collected (mean age 40.6±10.3 years; 78.0% <50 year-old, 71.7% born in Italy). Overall, 38.5% of CW had received last vaccination shot >10 years before the survey (mean: 8.8 ± 8.2 years). The majority of boosters had been administered by Vaccination Services of the Local Health Unit (47.3%), followed by Occupational Physicians (20.0%) and General Practitioners (11.2%). In 85.9% of CWs, a monovalent formulation was used. Combined TeV were mainly reported in CW who had received last vaccination shot in Vaccination Services (96.2%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TeV coverage rates in CWs are insufficient, and vaccination shots are frequently performed with inappropriate, monovalent formulates. As only professionals from Vaccination Services systematically employ combined vaccines and particularly Tdap, our results not only stress the opportunity for promoting TeV among CWs, but also the importance of improving reception of up to date official recommendations in Occupational Physicians, General Practitioner and professionals of Emergency Departments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".