Awareness Among Parents About Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Routine Immunization Program to Prevent Pneumococcal Pneumonia in Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction This study was conducted in two purposively selected slums of Dhaka to assess parents’ awareness of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) in reducing the occurrence of death due to pneumococcal pneumonia. Methods Using a semi-structured questionnaire, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 150 parents. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 20 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) and Chi-square (χ2) test performed to determine associations. Results About 35% of parents were found to be aware of PCV; of them, 92.5% were informed by health service providers, and 81.1% mentioned benefits of PCV. Most parents were unaware of the PCV vaccination status of children, and no significant association was found between vaccination status and parents’ socioeconomic status. Aware parents vaccinated their children, and the association of awareness with vaccination status was statistically significant for PCV-1 (P = 0.04) and PCV-2 (P < 0.001). Although 7.4% of parents did not vaccinate their child with PCV-3 due to a child’s sickness or other priorities in household work, the association was significant (P = 0.01). Conclusion Strengthened efforts by health service providers, prioritizing dissemination of key messages on PCV, its benefits, and side-effects, can motivate parents and reduce dropout 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".