MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210534353 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab015

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline for Immunizations in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)—Part 1: Live Vaccines

2021· review· en· W4210534353 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Eric I. Benchimol, Frances Tse, Matthew Carroll, Jennifer deBruyn, Shelly McNeil, Anne Pham‐Huy, Cynthia H. Seow, Lisa Barrett, Talat Bessissow, Nicholas Carman, Gil Melmed, Otto G. Vanderkooi, John K. Marshall, Jennifer Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of OttawaMcGill University Health CentreMcMaster UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationUniversity of CalgaryQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentrePopulation Health Research InstituteChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and DiabetesCrohn's and Colitis CanadaCanadian Association of GastroenterologyCanadian Child Health Clinician Scientist Program
KeywordsMedicineInflammatory bowel diseaseVaccinationGuidelineIntensive care medicineDiseasePopulationImmunologyInternal medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable diseases. The effectiveness and safety of vaccinations may be altered by immunosuppressive therapies or IBD itself. These recommendations, developed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and endorsed by the American Gastroenterological Association, aim to provide guidance on immunizations in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. This publication focused on live vaccines. METHODS: Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of vaccines in patients with IBD, other immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, and the general population were performed. Critical outcomes included mortality, vaccine-preventable diseases, and serious adverse events. Immunogenicity was considered a surrogate outcome for vaccine efficacy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Key questions were developed through an iterative process and voted on by a multidisciplinary panel. Recommendations were formulated using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. Strong recommendation means that most patients should receive the recommended course of action, whereas a conditional recommendation means that different choices will be appropriate for different patients. RESULTS: Three good practice statements included reviewing a patient's vaccination status at diagnosis and at regular intervals, giving appropriate vaccinations as soon as possible, and not delaying urgently needed immunosuppressive therapy to provide vaccinations. There are 4 recommendations on the use of live vaccines. Measles, mumps, rubella vaccine is recommended for both adult and pediatric patients with IBD not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications (conditional). Varicella vaccine is recommended for pediatric patients with IBD not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications (conditional). For adults, recommendations are conditionally in favor of varicella vaccine for those not on immunosuppressive therapy, and against for those on therapy. No recommendation was made regarding the use of live vaccines in infants born to mothers using biologics because the desirable and undesirable effects were closely balanced and the evidence was insufficient. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining appropriate vaccination status in patients with IBD is critical to optimize patient outcomes. In general, live vaccines are recommended in patients not on immunosuppressive therapy, but not for those using immunosuppressive medications. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of live vaccines in patients on immunosuppressive therapy.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.006

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207