MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548484692 · doi:10.1016/j.vacrep.2016.10.001

Vaccine coverage for kindergarteners: Factors associated with school and area variation in Vancouver, British Columbia

2016· article· en· W2548484692 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard M. Carpiano, Julie A. Bettinger

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisadvantagedDemographyPsychological interventionGeographyTobit modelPsychologyGerontologyMedicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the extent to which school-specific kindergarten vaccination up-to-date status prevalence differs by public and private school types, student demographic composition, and geographic location across schools in Vancouver, and four adjacent British Columbia communities, during 2013–14. School-specific kindergarten coverage for seven vaccinations plus up-to-date status were merged with data on school type and student sociodemographic composition for 219 schools within 9 Local Health Areas (LHAs). In adjusted Tobit regression models, private non-religious (versus public) schools were associated with lower up-to-date status (b = −9.51 percentage points). Student enrollment was positively associated with higher coverage, while greater number of English Language Learners (ELL), students speaking English at home, and Aboriginal students were each negatively associated with up-to-date coverage. The most socioeconomically disadvantaged and advantaged LHAs had the lowest coverage. Our findings identify lower coverage among some types of private schools and in affluent and disadvantaged communities—and corroborate documented US coverage patterns. Future studies need to investigate school and community factors that may contribute to such patterns, in order to identify potential mechanisms and design appropriate interventions to increase vaccine coverage.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccine ReportsSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207