MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883261553 · doi:10.25071/ryr.v2i0.40372

York University Students Perceptions of Influenza and the Influenza Vaccine

2015· article· en· W2883261553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Fusca

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue YOUR Review (York Online Undergraduate Research) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaImmunizationInfluenza vaccinePublic healthPerceptionPublic universitySeasonal influenzaMedicinePandemicSituatedFamily medicineMedical educationPsychologyPolitical scienceVaccinationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)VirologyNursingImmunologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)DiseasePublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to investigate perceptions regarding seasonal influenza immunization among university-aged students. The study aims to explore students’ insights, opinions, and views regarding seasonal influenza immunization and the possible motives or obstacles that either incite or prevent students from getting an influenza vaccine. The study was carried out at York University’s Keele campus, a densely populated commuter school situated in a large metropolitan area, and involved York University students as participants. The study sought to determine whether the recommendation by Canadian Public Health Agencies that getting a flu shot remains the primary step to be taken in preventing the spread of the influenza virus, is a shared view among York University students. University-aged students’ perceptions and beliefs about the benefits or risks associated with the flu shot may therefore be considered important information among public health policy makers in understanding students’ compliance with this official advice.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue YOUR Review (York Online Undergraduate Research)Same topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207