ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique
[The immunization practices of nursing staff in local community health centers].
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNurses have an important role in keeping the youth of Quebec vaccinated. Little, however, is known about nurses' immunization practices. The purpose of this research is to identify the immunization practices of nursing staff in local community health centres who vaccinate children aged 0 to 5 years and to outline personal outcomes and barriers to performing these practices.
methodsA Delphi consultation project was conducted with immunization experts in Quebec. The consultation included 4 phases during which participants expressed their opinions on concepts through a series of questionnaires. The research team created a consolidated common response at each stage in order to produce a final consensus.
resultsEighteen specialists participated in at least 1 of the consultation phases. The consultation allowed for the identification of 35 ideal immunization practices which were grouped into 11 higher-order categories. Eleven expected outcomes were also identified as well as 51 barriers to ideal immunization practices which in turn were grouped into 7 higher-order categories.
conclusionAccording to experts, immunization practices are varied and include technical acts as well as relational, organizational, and continuing education activities. These practices are expected to generate outcomes for professionals and their clientele. However, a number of barriers to achieving ideal vaccination practices are also observed. The picture of immunization practices by nurses in local community health centres and their perception of outcomes and barriers will be studied during the next stages of the project. This process will lead to developing intervention strategies with vaccinators.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17896744PMC6976023W2906182255What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.