P387 Rapid Implementation of an Evidence-Based, Virtual COVID-19 Vaccine Education Clinic at the Nova Scotia Collaborative Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinic (NSCIBD) Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The COVID-19 global pandemic has been associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Rapid adaptation of approaches to clinical management as well as policy decisions in relation to implementation of vaccination programs for persons living with IBD has been required throughout the pandemic. To meet the sudden demand of large scale public health-mandated COVID-19 vaccine education for patients living with IBD in Nova Scotia a novel, evidence-based, virtual COVID-19 vaccine educational intervention was developed, implemented, and evaluated. Methods This was a prospective, observational, cross sectional, implementation-effectiveness study conducted at the NSCIBD program between April-July, 2021. The educational intervention consisted of a standardized email outlining evidence relating to risks and benefits of COVID-19 vaccinations. The intervention was offered to all patients contacting the NSCIBD program with questions or concerns about the vaccine. During one-on-one virtual visits, standardized and evidence-based information was provided by a gastroenterologist or IBD nurse practitioner. Following the session, an anonymous questionnaire (NoviSurvey) evaluated key implementation metrics including satisfaction, appropriateness, usefulness, perceived impact on knowledge and vaccine hesitancy, willingness to participate in future sessions, and recommendations for improvement. Descriptive analyses were conducted, with group means expressed as proportions for categorical variables and means for numerical variables. Results A total of, 265 patients were invited to participate in the online survey, with a response rate of, 49% (131/265). Before the session, 48.9% (64/131) expressed COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and, 26% (35/131) expressed concerns relating to risks versus benefits of COVID-19 vaccines. Ninety-one percent (119/131) of respondents found the education program to be helpful and, 92% (121/131) indicated there was no information perceived to be lacking from the session. Following the intervention, the proportion of those willing to get vaccinated rose from, 61% to, 86.3%. Only, 1.5% (2/131) indicated that they would likely not get vaccinated. Most participants (77%, 101/131) found the written and virtually administered educational content to be satisfactory and, 88% (115/131) were willing to participate in similar virtual education offerings in the future. Conclusion Implementation of an evidence-based, multidisciplinary COVID-19 vaccination education intervention delivered using a virtual platform was perceived to be feasible, acceptable, and effective by IBD patients. Further research on innovative, evidence-based, multidisciplinary educational interventions and the impact of these interventions on IBD clinical outcomes are needed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".