MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130766223 · doi:10.1093/ibd/izab033

Suboptimal Vaccination Administration in Mothers With Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Their Biologic-Exposed Infants

2021· article· en· W3130766223 on OpenAlexaff
Hélène Chiarella-Redfern, Sang‐Min Lee, Bellal Jubran, Nastaran Sharifi, Remo Panaccione, Cora Constantinescu, Eric I. Benchimol, Cynthia H. Seow

Bibliographic record

VenueInflammatory Bowel Diseases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationOdds ratioHepatitis A vaccinePediatricsDiphtheriaHepatitis ARotavirus vaccineTetanusInflammatory bowel diseaseConfidence intervalMeasles-Mumps-Rubella VaccineMeaslesRubellaImmunologyRotavirusInternal medicineHepatitisDiseaseVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk of developing complications from vaccine-preventable infections. We investigated the factors influencing vaccine administration in pregnant women with IBD and their infants, in addition to the safety of vaccination in the infants. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified individuals from a tertiary referral clinic whose records were linked to a provincial vaccine database. We conducted χ 2 tests, Fisher exact tests, and logistic regression adjusting for age and disease duration to compare vaccine administration by medication class. Potential rotavirus vaccine adverse events were determined in infants of women with IBD. RESULTS: We included 303 pregnant women and 262 infants. Vaccines were administered to women on biologic therapy as follows: hepatitis B virus (82.9%), diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (82.1%), and hepatitis A virus (49.3%). The influenza vaccination was provided peripartum in 50.7% of patients. The measles-mumps-rubella-varicella vaccine was provided to 89.3% of women before biologic initiation. Women treated with a biologic (adjusted odds ratio, 2.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-4.35) or immunomodulator (adjusted odds ratio, 4.00; 95% confidence interval, 2.22-7.69) were more likely to receive the Prevnar 13 and Pneumovax 23 vaccines than were unexposed individuals, but the overall proportion vaccinated was low (Prevnar 13, 35.7%; Pneumovax 23, 39.3%). At least 90% of infants received the measles-mumps-rubella-varicella vaccine and inactivated vaccines. Fourteen biologic-exposed children (19.2%) received the live rotavirus vaccine with no significant differences in adverse events compared with biologic-unexposed infants (7.1% vs 8.2%, P = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Better education surrounding vaccine recommendations is required for both health care providers and individuals with IBD given poor pneumococcal, hepatitis A virus, and influenza vaccination rates. Inadvertent administration of the rotavirus vaccine in biologic-exposed infants did not result in more adverse events, raising the possibility of safety.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInflammatory Bowel DiseasesSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207