MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414841103 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-100963

Effectiveness of vaccination in patients undergoing dialysis or patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review protocol

2025· review· en· W4414841103 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Milone, Amos Buh, Nicole Wisener, Cerine Benomar, Phalone Mei Nsen, Ayub Akbari, Pierre Antoine Brown, Gregory L. Hundemer, Manish M. Sood

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaMcMaster UniversityOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)VaccinationKidney diseaseDialysisSystematic reviewMEDLINEPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Vaccination has been an effective public health intervention for immunising individuals against many common communicable and non-communicable diseases. However, there is limited information on the efficacy of vaccination among patients undergoing dialysis or patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The objective of this review is to assess the effectiveness of vaccination within dialysis and CKD patient populations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a systematic review of studies assessing the effectiveness of vaccination among CKD and dialysis patients. Relevant studies will be identified using MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library. All searches will be conducted from database inception to October 2025. Only observational studies such as cohort, prospective, retrospective and cross-sectional studies will be included. Data pertaining to patient outcomes and study design will be extracted. A narrative synthesis will be conducted as well as a meta-analysis if data permitting this analysis is extracted from included studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since data collection will be conducted by examining existing studies, no ethical approval or consent will be required. The results of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal as well as presented at seminars, conferences and symposiums. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This review protocol has been registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42025648534.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.015
Bibliometrics0.0110.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.009

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.408 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research→French-language works237,207→