MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321003859 · doi:10.1017/s0714980822000538

Digital Immunization Tracking in Long-Term Care and Assisted Living Facilities

2023· article· en· W4321003859 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kumanan Wilson, Lindsay A. Wilson, Kelsey T. Rusk, Justine L. Henry, Kathryn M. Denize, Amy T. Hsu, Heidi Sveistrup

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsVaccinationPsychological interventionImmunizationPandemicLong-term careCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Health careTracking (education)BusinessEnvironmental healthMedicineGerontologyPsychologyNursingEconomic growthImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A disproportionate share of the health impacts of COVID-19 has been borne by older adults, particularly those in long-term care facilities (LTCs). Vaccination has been critical to efforts to combat this issue, but as we begin to emerge from this pandemic, questions remain about how to protect the health of residents of LTC and assisted living facilities proactively in order to prevent such a disaster from occurring again. Vaccination, not just against COVID-19, but also against other vaccine-preventable illness, will be a key component of this effort. However, there are currently substantial gaps in the uptake of vaccines recommended for older adults. Technology offers an opportunity to assist in filling these vaccination gaps. Our experiences in Fredericton, New Brunswick suggest that a digital immunization solution would facilitate better uptake of adult vaccines for older adults in assisted and independent living facilities and would help policy and decision makers to identify coverage gaps and develop interventions to protect these individuals.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207