MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293113664 · doi:10.14740/wjon1460

External Supports Are Associated With the COVID-19 Vaccination in Chinese Breast Cancer Patients: A Cross-Sectional Survey

2022· article· en· W4293113664 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiang Yu Wang, Qiang Liu, Wen Xiang Zhang, Tian Wang, Nian Chang Wang, Zhong Zhao Wang, Yi Fang, Xiang Yi Kong, Jing Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationBreast cancerOdds ratioConfidence intervalCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CancerCross-sectional studyPandemicFamily medicineInternal medicineDiseaseImmunologyPathologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic. Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignant cancer in China. Considering the specific national conditions, no evidence is available for factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination in patients with breast cancer. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey, fielded from June 21 through June 27, 2021. A total of 944 nationally representative samples of Chinese breast cancer patients participating in the survey were included. Participant surveys included questions addressing who finished COVID-19 vaccination with the question "Have you taken the COVID-19 vaccine?", and response options were "Yes" and "No". Results: Overall, 730 (77.33%) women with breast cancer were unvaccinated, and only 214 (22.67%) were vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine. After adjusting for potential confounders, including both sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, we found that external support, including positive doctor suggestions (odds ratio (OR): 5.52; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.50 - 8.71; P < 0.0001), positive support from surrounding people (OR: 11.65; 95% CI: 7.57 - 17.91; P < 0.0001), and negative initiative from the community (OR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.06 - 0.35; P < 0.0001), was associated with COVID-19 vaccination rates among breast cancer patients. These results remain stable in subgroup analyses. We found that most participants (82.52%) understood the necessity of COVID-19 vaccinations in China was strong; however, the recognition regarding the COVID-19 vaccine showed different patterns between vaccinated and unvaccinated participants. Conclusions: Our findings suggest external support, including vaccination suggestions from surgeons or oncologists, vaccination suggestions from associated people, and residents' committee mandated vaccinations, was associated with the COVID-19 vaccination rates. Interventions regarding these factors and improving publicity as well as education regarding COVID-19 vaccines among breast cancer patients are warranted.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of OncologySame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207