MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407590872 · doi:10.1097/inf.0000000000004643

DECIDE, A Pregnancy-specific Patient-provider Communication Approach: Multi-method and Codesign

2025· article· en· W4407590872 on OpenAlexaff
Medea Myers-Stewart, Monica Santosh Surti, Madison Kennedy, Marcia Bruce, Maria Castrellon Pardo, Andrea M. Patey, Maoliosa Donald, Zaileen Jamal, Maria Santana, Eliana Castillo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalNova Scotia Health AuthorityOttawa HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisPregnancyOutreachUsabilityQualitative researchMedicinePsychologyMedical educationNursingFamily medicineComputer scienceApplied psychologyHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vaccination in pregnancy is recommended for preventing maternal and infant morbidity, but uptake is low. Existing presumptive and participatory vaccine communication approaches for childhood vaccinations may not encompass the nuanced decision-making during pregnancy. METHODS: We employed a multi-method study using the double diamond design framework to codesign a pregnancy-specific, person-centered communication approach. Key activities of each double diamond phase are listed below:Discover: Conducted a scoping review, a survey assessing psychological antecedents of (n = 237) pregnant or lactating individuals, qualitative interviews with (n = 169) patients and (n = 47) healthcare providers (HCPs) and gathered insights through (n = 20) community outreach events to understand the problem.Define: Synthesized findings through thematic analysis and key informant interviews, to validate our understanding of the problem.Develop: Prototyped solutions through role-playing, iterative feedback with patient partners and HCPs, and qualitative inquiry into parental preferences.Deliver: Finalized the communication approach after iterative usability testing with (n = 15) HCPs and feedback-driven refinement with (n = 9) patient partners. RESULTS: We confirmed the need for a pregnancy-specific communication approach and identified key gaps. We then built a prototype where perinatal HCPs could use either a presumptive if acceptant or participatory if hesitant approach but questioned the applicability of vaccine hesitancy to pregnancy. We abandoned a solely presumptive approach given parental insights: it is normal to "question" during pregnancy and developed a balanced approach. The final DECIDE (determine, elicit, consent, interactive discussion, deliver, empower) communication approach balances shared decision-making with a clear recommendation. It addresses pregnant individuals' desire for autonomy and support, and HCPs call for simple tools to improve their confidence and communication skills without alienating their patients. CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS: DECIDE is a pregnancy-specific vaccine communication approach potentially applicable to other interventions beyond vaccination.

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)0.145
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.244
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1450.244
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Pediatric Infectious Disease JournalSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207