MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185631382 · doi:10.1080/14760584.2021.1956906

A practitioner’s guide to the recombinant zoster vaccine: review of national vaccination recommendations

2021· review· en· W3185631382 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raunak Parikh, Robyn Widenmaier, Nicolas Lecrenier

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Vaccines · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaccinationMedicineVirologyRecombinant DNAFamily medicineImmunologyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) is currently licensed in over 30 countries for the prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) in adults aged ≥50 years. We conducted a review of available national guidelines or recommendations on RZV use to identify the similarities and differences and highlight any potential gaps. AREAS COVERED: National recommendations from ten countries (Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK and the USA) are summarized under the following seven topics: HZ vaccine preference, age group recommendations, considerations prior to vaccination, dose schedule, co-administration with other vaccines, vaccination of special populations, and vaccine safety profile. In seven of these countries, RZV is the preferred or the only recommended HZ vaccine. There were some differences in age group recommendations, reflecting evaluations dependent on public funding. There were also differences with respect to use in immunocompromised and other special populations. EXPERT OPINION: The high efficacy and anticipated public health impact of RZV led to expanded national recommendations for RZV vaccination compared to previous HZ recommendation in many countries. Possible areas that could be considered in future revisions of national recommendations, including use in immunocompromised adults ≥18 years, are also highlighted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.407 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations49
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of VaccinesSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207