Exploring the impact of Quebec’s vaccine lottery and vaccine passports on Covid-19 vaccination intention: Findings from repeated cross-sectional surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Quebec, during the summer of 2021, different strategies to enhance COVID-19 vaccine uptake were implemented (e.g. mobile vaccination clinics, mass communication campaigns, home vaccination). The aim was that at least 75% of 12 years and older individuals receive two doses of COVID-19 vaccines before the fall. This article explores the impact of incentives and disincentive strategies on Quebecers' intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19. A series of cross-sectional surveys have been ongoing in Quebec since March 2020 to measure Quebecers' attitudes and behaviors during the pandemic. In July and August 2021, in addition to sociodemographic information, the survey assessed COVID-19 risks perceptions, adherence to and perception of recommended measures (e.g. masks, physical distancing, vaccine lottery, vaccine passport) as attitudes and intention toward COVID-19 vaccines. Descriptive statistics were generated. Between July 9 to September 1, the vaccine uptake (two doses) rose from 62% to 88%. Among respondents who were unvaccinated during the period, 32% reported a positive influence of the lottery on their intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and 39% for the vaccine passport. Approximately half (51%) of unvaccinated respondents reported no influence from the two measures, and both positively influenced 20%. The vaccine lottery had a limited impact on willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccines among unvaccinated adults in Quebec, but the implementation of the vaccine passport appears more influential based on survey respondents' responses.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".