Awareness and likelihood of accepting COVID-19 vaccines among the university students of Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Massive vaccination is very important to end the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study determined the willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine by the university students of Bangladesh and identified their apprehension about the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines. Students were invited to complete an online cross-sectional survey (April 3 to June 10, 2021) to explore the intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and other factors regarding the responsiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine. Among the 191 respondent students, 52.9% willingly agreed to receive a vaccine, where the remaining was either not decided yet (27.7%) or was not intended to get vaccinated (15.7%). The odd of getting a vaccine were only 1.15. About 83.2% of students were conscious about the severity of COVID-19 and many students responded that they are well-versed about vaccine activity (67.5%) and risk factors (66%). Among the approved vaccines, most students preferred the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 (38.7%) and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 (34%). As some of the students still have lesser intent to accept vaccines, public health officials need to be more proactive to focus on vaccine safety and benefits to enhance vaccine coverage among university students of Bangladesh.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".