MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309118678 · doi:10.3390/vaccines10111937

A Systematic Review on Vaccine Hesitancy in Black Communities in Canada: Critical Issues and Research Failures

2022· review· en· W4309118678 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jude Mary Cénat, Pari‐Gole Noorishad, Schwab Bakombo, Olivia Onesi, Aya Mesbahi, Wina Paul Darius, Lisa Caulley, Sanni Yaya, Marie‐Hélène Chomienne, Josephine Etowa, Vivek Venkatesh, Rose Darly Dalexis, Roland Pongou, Patrick Labelle

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccines · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityInstitut du Savoir MontfortUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsPsycINFOMEDLINEDemographyFamily medicineMedicineSystematic reviewMeta-analysisGerontologyPolitical scienceSociologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black communities have been disproportionately impacted by Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Canada, in terms of both number of infections and mortality rates. Yet, according to early studies, vaccine hesitancy appears to be higher in Black communities. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the prevalence and factors associated with vaccine hesitancy in Black communities in Canada. Peer-reviewed studies published from 11 March 2020 to 26 July 2022, were searched through eleven databases: APA PsycInfo (Ovid), Cairn.info, Canadian Business & Current Affairs (ProQuest), CPI.Q (Gale OneFile), Cochrane CENTRAL (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Érudit, Global Health (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Web of Science (Clarivate). Eligible studies were published in French or English and had empirical data on the prevalence or factors associated with vaccine hesitancy in samples or subsamples of Black people. Only five studies contained empirical data on vaccine hesitancy in Black individuals and were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. Black individuals represented 1.18% (n = 247) of all included study samples (n = 20,919). Two of the five studies found that Black individuals were more hesitant to be vaccinated against COVID-19 compared to White individuals, whereas the other three found no significant differences. The studies failed to provide any evidence of factors associated with vaccine hesitancy in Black communities. Despite national concerns about vaccine hesitancy in Black communities, a color-blind approach is still predominant in Canadian health research. Of about 40 studies containing empirical data on vaccine hesitancy in Canada, only five contained data on Black communities. None analyzed factors associated with vaccine hesitancy in Black communities. Policies and strategies to strengthen health research in Black communities and eliminate the color-blind approach are discussed.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.174
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.174
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.010
Bibliometrics0.0160.020
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations41
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccinesSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207