Children’s fear and distress during a hospital-based family flu vaccine clinic: A parent survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate parents’ perception of their child(ren)’s distress before, during, and after influenza (flu) vaccination, and their perceived effectiveness of pain and distress management strategies used during the vaccination process. This is a cross-sectional survey of parents attending Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario’s 2018 family flu clinic. After vaccination, parents completed a paper-based survey concerning demographics, fear and distress levels, and use and perceived effectiveness of pain/distress management interventions provided before and during the vaccination process. All survey data were entered into Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics; qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. A total of 164 parents completed the survey, reporting data on 327 children aged 6 months to 18 years (83% of children were vaccinated). Of 327 children, nearly half ( n = 142, 44%) were reported to be moderately to severely distressed before, during, or after the vaccination process. The parents reported that 268 (82%) children received pain/distress management strategies during vaccination. Over half ( n = 138, 57%) of the parents reported that the strategies used were very effective. Despite frequent use and parents’ perceived effectiveness of pain/distress management interventions, nearly half of the children were perceived by parents as moderately to severely distressed during the vaccination process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".