Health Behavior Associated With Influenza Vaccination Among Healthcare Workers in Long-Term-Care Facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the health behavior associated with influenza vaccination among healthcare workers (HCWs) in long-term-care facilities. DESIGN: A cross-sectional, self-administered survey of HCWs, augmented with focus groups to further examine attitudes toward influenza vaccination. SETTING: Two long-term-care facilities participated in the survey. The focus groups were held at one of the two facilities. PARTICIPANTS: All HCWs were invited to participate in the survey and all nonmanagerial staff members were invited to participate in the focus groups. The response rate for the survey was 58% (231 of 401). RESULTS: Vaccinated HCWs had a more positive attitude toward influenza vaccination and a greater belief that the vaccine is effective. This was not accompanied by differences in vaccine knowledge or values of potential preventive outcomes. Nonvaccinated respondents were more likely to believe that other preventive measures, such as washing hands, taking vitamins and supplements, eating a nutritious diet, exercising, and taking homeopathic or naturopathic medications, were more effective than vaccination. Additional findings from the focus groups suggest that HCWs believe that the main purpose of influenza vaccination programs is to protect residents' health at the expense, potential harm, and burden of responsibility of the staff. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies challenges to and opportunities for improving vaccination rates among HCWs. A message that emphasizes the health benefits of vaccination to staff members, such as including vaccination as part of a staff "wellness" program, may improve the credibility of influenza immunization programs and coverage rates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".