MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035767699 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0234702

Seasonal influenza vaccination in older people: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the determining factors

2020· review· en· W3035767699 on OpenAlexaff
George N. Okoli, Olt Lam, Florentin Racovitan, Viraj K. Reddy, Christiaan H. Righolt, Christine Neilson, Ayman Chit, Edward W. Thommes, Ahmed M Abou-Setta, Salaheddin M. Mahmud

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of TorontoUniversity of ManitobaGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation
FundersSanofi PasteurSanofiGlaxoSmithKlinePfizer
KeywordsVaccinationMeta-analysisMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalDemographyInfluenza vaccinePopulationReceiptGerontologyEnvironmental healthImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Despite influenza vaccination programs in various jurisdictions, seasonal influenza vaccine (SIV) uptake remains suboptimal among older people (≥65years old), an important subpopulation for influenza vaccination. We sought to summarize determinants of SIV uptake (any vaccine receipt) and vaccination adherence (receipt of vaccine in two or more seasons in sequence) among older people. METHODS: We searched for population-based studies conducted in community-dwelling older people (irrespective of their health status) from 2000-2019. Two reviewers independently selected publications for inclusion. One reviewer extracted data from the included studies; a second checked the extracted data for errors. Disagreements were resolved by discussion and consensus, or a third reviewer. We were interested in the determinants of SIV uptake and vaccination adherence. Where appropriate, we pooled adjusted results using the inverse variance, random-effects method and reported the odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Out of 11,570 citations screened, we included 34 cross-sectional studies. The following were associated with increased SIV uptake: being older (OR 1.52, 95%CI 1.38-1.67 [21 studies]), white (1.30, 1.14-1.49 [10 studies]), married (1.23, 1.17-1.28 [9 studies]), non-smoker (1.28, 1.11-1.47 [7 studies]), of a higher social class (1.20, 1.06-1.36 [2 studies]), having a higher education (1.12, 1.04-1.21 [14 studies]), having a higher household income (1.11, 1.05-1.18 [8 studies]), having a chronic illness (1.53, 1.44-1.63 [16 studies]), having poor self-assessed health (1.23, 1.02-1.40 [9 studies]), having a family doctor (2.94, 1.79-4.76 [2 studies]), and having health insurance (1.58, 1.13-2.21 [6 studies]). The influence of these factors varied across geographical regions. Being older (1.26, 1.11-1.44 [2 studies]) was also associated with increased vaccination adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Several factors may determine SIV uptake and vaccination adherence among older people. More studies are needed to provide a stronger evidence base for planning more effective influenza vaccination programs.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.032
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.358
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.069 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations95
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207