Impact of the first vaccine dose on COVID-19 and its complications in long-term care facilities and private residences for seniors in Québec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and private residences for seniors (PRSs) were given priority for vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given the shortage of vaccine in the winter of 2021, the Comité sur l’immunisation du Québec recommended postponing the administration of second doses to ensure more rapid and widespread administration of first doses. The objective of this study was to measure the impact of first-dose vaccination on 1) the incidence of cases and complications in LTCFs and PRSs and 2) the frequency of outbreaks in LTCFs. Methods: In this ecological study, COVID-19 incidence and complications in residents of LTCFs and PRSs in Québec were compared with the general (community) population at a point in time when there was still only limited eligibility for vaccination. Results: After vaccination in LTCFs, the incidence rate of COVID-19 decreased by 92% compared with 49% in the community, and deaths decreased by 95%. By six weeks post-vaccination, almost no facility reported five or more cases per 100 beds per week. The incidence rate decreased by 91% in PRSs compared with 2% in the community. Hospitalizations and deaths in PRSs decreased by 94% and 90%, respectively. Conclusion: As a result of 1) vaccination of residents with one dose, 2) natural immunity already acquired in LTCFs and PRSs, 3) vaccination of healthcare workers and 4) other non-pharmaceutical prevention measures implemented, the circulation of the coronavirus in these settings was largely interrupted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".