MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205581844 · doi:10.1089/heq.2021.0048

Orange County, California COVID-19 Vaccine Equity Best Practices Checklist: A Community-Centered Call to Action for Equitable Vaccination Practices

2022· article· en· W4205581844 on OpenAlexaff
Kameko Washburn, Alana M. W. LeBrón, Abigail Reyes, Isabel Becerra, America Bracho, Ellen Ahn, Ana Siria Urzúa, Mary Anne Foo, Salvador Zárate, Sora Park Tanjasiri, Bernadette Boden‐Albala

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Equity · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsHome and Community Care Support Services
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsHealth equityEquity (law)ChecklistPublic healthCommunity engagementPolitical sciencePandemicPublic relationsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyDiseaseNursingInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has exacerbated longstanding inequities throughout the United States, disproportionately concentrating adverse social, economic, and health-related outcomes among low-income communities and communities of color. Inequitable distribution, prioritization, and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines due to systemic and organizational barriers add to these disproportionate impacts across the United States. Similar patterns have been observed within Orange County, California (OC). Methods: In response to COVID-19 vaccine inequities unfolding locally, the Orange County Health Equity COVID-19 community–academic partnership generated a tool to guide a more equitable vaccine approach. Contents of the OC vaccine equity best practices checklist emerged through synthesis of community-level knowledge about vaccine inequities, literature regarding equitable vaccination considerations, and practice-based health equity guides. We combined into a memo: the checklist, a written explanation of its goals and origins, and three specific action steps meant to further strengthen the focus on vaccine equity. The memo was endorsed by partnership members and distributed to county officials. Discussion: Since the initial composition of the checklist, the local vaccine distribution approach has shifted, suggesting that equitable pandemic responses require continual re-evaluation of local needs and adjustments to recommendations as new information emerges. To understand and address structural changes needed to reduce racial and socioeconomic inequities exacerbated by the pandemic, authentic partnerships between community, academic, and public health practice partners are necessary. Conclusion: As we face continued COVID-19 vaccine rollout, booster vaccination, and future pandemic challenges, community knowledge and public health literature should be integrated to inform similar equity-driven strategic actions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.047
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0470.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.538
GPT teacher head0.629
Teacher spread0.091 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth EquitySame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207