MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205311090 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.10.002

Canadian parents’ perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination and intention to vaccinate their children: Results from a cross-sectional national survey

2021· article· en· W3205311090 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversity of WaterlooPublic Health OntarioUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoBC Children's HospitalDalhousie UniversityUniversité LavalUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)VaccinationCross-sectional study2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicineVirologyEnvironmental healthFamily medicinePediatricsPsychologyOutbreakDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vaccinating children (≤17 years old) is important for controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. As parents are primary decision makers for their children, we aimed to assess parents' perceptions and intentions regarding COVID-19 vaccination for their children, including for some underserved populations (e.g., newcomers, Indigenous peoples, and visible minority groups). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional national survey of Canadian parents in December 2020, just as COVID-19 vaccines were approved for adults, to assess intention to vaccinate their children (aged 0-17 years) against COVID-19, perceptions of COVID-19 disease and vaccines, previous uptake of influenza and routine vaccines, and sociodemographic characteristics. Binomial logistic regression was used to assess the association between parents' lack of COVID-19 vaccination intention for their children and various independent variables. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of parents (1074/1702) intended to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. Those employed part-time (compared to full-time) had lower intention to vaccinate their children (aOR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.06-2.84), while those who spoke languages other than English, French, or Indigenous languages were less likely to have low intention (aOR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.32-0.92). Low vaccination intention was also associated with children not receiving influenza vaccine pre-pandemic (aOR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.04-2.21), parents having low intention to vaccinate themselves against COVID-19 (aOR = 9.22, 95% CI: 6.43-13.34), believing COVID-19 vaccination is unnecessary (aOR = 2.59, 95% CI: 1.72-3.91) or unsafe (aOR = 4.21, 95% CI: 2.96-5.99), and opposing COVID-19 vaccine use in children without prior testing (aOR = 3.09, 95% CI: 1.87-5.24). INTERPRETATION: Parents' COVID-19 vaccination intentions for their children are better predicted by previous decisions regarding influenza vaccination than routine childhood vaccines, and other perceptions of COVID-19 vaccine-related factors. Public communication should highlight the safety and necessity of COVID-19 vaccination in children to support a return to normal activities. Further research should assess actual COVID-19 vaccination uptake in children, particularly for underserved populations.

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.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.296 · 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