766. "Assessing the impact of advanced vaccine education on pharmacy students’ knowledge, confidence, and preparedness in becoming future immunization providers: A National Study"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background With community pharmacists emerging as prominent immunization providers, there is an increased need for additional training in this area. The primary objective of this pre-post questionnaire study was to evaluate the impact of a comprehensive webinar on advanced vaccine education on the knowledge, confidence, and preparedness of undergraduate PharmD students across Canada. Methods A 25-question, web-based survey was administered to PharmD students at seven Canadian pharmacy schools prior to and immediately after attending a comprehensive educational webinar from March 13th to April 7th, 2023. The pre- and post- survey data were analyzed using SPSS 26. A Friedman rank test was performed on questions which answers consisted of ordinal data. Results In a group of 355 pharmacy students across Canada who attended our live educational webinars, 279 completed the pre-survey questionnaire, and 132 students completed the post-survey questionnaire. Pre-survey questionnaire results showed knowledge and confidence gaps in the areas of addressing vaccine hesitancy, immunization assessment, and recommended vaccinations. After the educational webinar event, students showed higher knowledge and confidence across all domains, and statistically significant improvements in critical areas pertaining to community vaccination practice. This highlights pedagogical changes which can be made to pharmacy school curriculums to better prepare students for future immunization practice. Conclusion Considerable knowledge gaps exist for graduating community pharmacists in vaccine education. Pharmacy students will benefit from integrated education focusing on addressing vaccine hesitancy, immunization status assessment, and jurisdictional routine immunization programs. Communities may also benefit from frontline healthcare providers who are highly trained and empowered with an expanded scope of practice to address their lifespan vaccination needs. Disclosures Ajit Johal, BSP BCPP RPh, CSL Seqirus: Advisor/Consultant|GSK: Honoraria|Merck: Honoraria|Pfizer: Honoraria
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".