MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410766060 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127309

Co-administration of vaccines in pregnancy: unique challenges and knowledge gaps

2025· review· en· W4410766060 on OpenAlexafffund
Bahaa Abu-Raya, Michelle Giles, Tobias R. Kollmann

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsPregnancyAdministration (probate law)VirologyMedicineBiologyPolitical scienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vaccination in pregnancy directly protects the mother and can prevent serious infections in early life. There are an increasing number of vaccines that are recommended during pregnancy and deployed in a growing number of countries. However, most recommendations for administration of these vaccines in pregnancy are based on studies that investigate one vaccine at a time. Largely lacking are data on the impact of co-administration including spacing and timing of the multiple vaccines during pregnancy on safety, efficacy and immunogenicity. We here place what is known into the context co-administration of vaccines with focus on the mother as well as the infant.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionFrench-language works237,207