The Implementation of the Professional Role of the Community Pharmacist in the Immunization Practices in Italy to Counteract Vaccine Hesitancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Italy, the National Vaccinal Prevention Plan has renewed the commitment of the Italian government to promote a culture of vaccination practices in the general population and especially among healthcare professionals, considering it as a strategic goal. The search for useful tools and techniques to promote a layered and widespread information network capable of restoring a climate of trust and confidence towards vaccination, leads us to reflect on the possibility, already adopted in numerous countries, of enlisting community pharmacies in immunization campaigns also in Italy, positively implementing the professional role of the community pharmacist in immunization. The pharmacist is often the first point of contact with both the patients and the public, both for the relationship of trust and confidence that binds him to the citizens, and for the ease of access in relation to the widespread distribution of community pharmacies in the territory, the availability of prolonged operating hours, the absence of need for appointments and positions near/outside of healthcare facilities. Currently, in Italy the role of the community pharmacist is limited to counseling and providing advice and information regarding the benefits and/or any risks of vaccination practices, but does not imply a direct engagement in immunization programs, rather a collaboration to avoid straining and overwhelming the vaccination centers. Some recent questionnaire-based studies have shown that Italian community pharmacists have attitudes that are favorable to vaccinations, even though their knowledge is rather limited. Together with expanding the engagement of community pharmacists in immunization programs, their educational gap should be addressed in order to significantly improve and enhance the protection of the public health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".