COVID-19 vaccine registry for pregnant women: policy to control complications of vaccination in pregnant women in 2021–2022
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data management related to COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women is vital to improve the treatment process and to establish preventive programs. Implementing a registry to manage data is an essential part of this process. This study aims to design a national model of the COVID-19 vaccination registry for pregnant women in Iran. METHODS: The present study is an applied descriptive study conducted in 2021 and 2022 in two stages. In the first stage, the coordinates of the National Registry of COVID-19 vaccination of pregnant women from related references and articles, as well as the comparative study of the National Registry of COVID-19 vaccination of pregnant women in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom was done. In the second stage, the preliminary model was designed. The model was validated using the Delphi technique and questionnaire tools and analyzing the data. RESULTS: The presented national COVID-19 vaccination registry model of pregnant women's main components consist of objectives, data sources, structure, minimum data set, standards, and registry processes, all of which received 100% expert consensus. CONCLUSION: The vaccination registry of pregnant women has a major role in managing COVID-19 vaccination data of pregnant women and can be one of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education priorities.
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 | 0.020 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".