MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225325589 · doi:10.1016/j.bbih.2022.100467

Brain and behavior in health communication: The Canadian COVID-19 Experiences Project

2022· article· en· W4225325589 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Peter A. Hall, Geoffrey T. Fong, Sara C Hitchman, Anne C K Quah, Thomas K Agar, Gang Meng, Hasan Ayaz, Bruce Doré, Mohammad Nazmus Sakib, Anna Hudson, Christian Boudreau

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Behavior & Immunity - Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitute of Population and Public HealthCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakRisk communicationVirologyPsychologyGeographyMedicineEnvironmental healthPathologyOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Vaccine hesitancy and inconsistent mitigation behavior performance have been significant challenges throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. In Canada, despite relatively high vaccine availability and uptake, willingness to accept booster shots and maintain mitigation behaviors in the post-acute phase of COVID-19 remain uncertain. The aim of the Canadian COVID-19 Experiences Project (CCEP) is threefold: 1) to identify social-cognitive and neurocognitive predictors of mitigation behaviors, 2) to identify optimal communication strategies to promote vaccination and mitigation behaviors, and 3) to examine brain health outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection and examine their longevity. Methods: The CCEP is comprised of two components: a conventional population survey (Study 1) and a functionally interconnected laboratory study (Study 2). Study 1 will involve 6 waves of data collection. Wave 1, completed between 28 September and 21 October 2021, recruited 1,958 vaccine-hesitant (49.8%) and fully vaccinated (50.2%) adults using quota sampling to ensure maximum statistical power. Measures included a variety of social cognitive (e.g., beliefs, intentions) and neurocognitive (e.g., delay discounting) measures, followed by an opportunity to view and rate a set of professionally produced COVID-19 public service announcement (PSA) videos for perceived efficacy. Study 2 employs the same survey items and PSAs but coupled with lab-based eye tracking and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to directly quantify neural indicators of attention capture and self-reflection in a smaller community sample. In the final phase of the project, subjective impressions and neural indicators of PSA efficacy will be compared and used to inform recommendations for construction of COVID-19 PSAs into the post-acute phase of the pandemic. Discussion: The CCEP provides a framework for evaluating effective COVID-19 communication strategies by levering conventional population surveys and the latest eye-tracking and brain imaging metrics. The CCEP will also yield important information about the brain health impacts of SARS-CoV-2 in the general population, in relation to current and future virus variants as they emerge.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain Behavior & Immunity - HealthSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207