MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315559424 · doi:10.2196/39166

Using Location Intelligence to Evaluate the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign in the United States: Spatiotemporal Big Data Analysis

2023· article· en· W4315559424 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qingfeng Li, James Cheng Peng, Diwakar Mohan, Brennan Lake, Alex Ruiz Euler, Brian W. Weir, Lena Kan, Peng Yang, Alain Labrique

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Big dataPandemicComputer scienceVaccinationPublic health surveillanceData sciencePublic healthVirologyMedicineData miningOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Highly effective COVID-19 vaccines are available and free of charge in the United States. With adequate coverage, their use may help return life back to normal and reduce COVID-19-related hospitalization and death. Many barriers to widespread inoculation have prevented herd immunity, including vaccine hesitancy, lack of vaccine knowledge, and misinformation. The Ad Council and COVID Collaborative have been conducting one of the largest nationwide targeted campaigns ("It's Up to You") to communicate vaccine information and encourage timely vaccination across the United States. More than 300 major brands, digital and print media companies, and community-based organizations support the campaigns to reach distinct audiences. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to use aggregated mobility data to assess the effectiveness of the campaign on COVID-19 vaccine uptake. METHODS: Campaign exposure data were collected from the Cuebiq advertising impact measurement platform consisting of about 17 million opted-in and deidentified mobile devices across the country. A Bayesian spatiotemporal hierarchical model was developed to assess campaign effectiveness through estimating the association between county-level campaign exposure and vaccination rates reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. To minimize potential bias in exposure to the campaign, the model included several control variables (eg, age, race or ethnicity, income, and political affiliation). We also incorporated conditional autoregressive residual models to account for apparent spatiotemporal autocorrelation. RESULTS: The data set covers a panel of 3104 counties from 48 states and the District of Columbia during a period of 22 weeks (March 29 to August 29, 2021). Officially launched in February 2021, the campaign reached about 3% of the anonymous devices on the Cuebiq platform by the end of March, which was the start of the study period. That exposure rate gradually declined to slightly above 1% in August 2021, effectively ending the study period. Results from the Bayesian hierarchical model indicate a statistically significant positive association between campaign exposure and vaccine uptake at the county level. A campaign that reaches everyone would boost the vaccination rate by 2.2% (95% uncertainty interval: 2.0%-2.4%) on a weekly basis, compared to the baseline case of no campaign. CONCLUSIONS: The "It's Up to You" campaign is effective in promoting COVID-19 vaccine uptake, suggesting that a nationwide targeted mass media campaign with multisectoral collaborations could be an impactful health communication strategy to improve progress against this and future pandemics. Methodologically, the results also show that location intelligence and mobile phone-based monitoring platforms can be effective in measuring impact of large-scale digital campaigns in near real time.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.319
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.146 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207