MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362582260 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.03.041

Pediatricians’ perceptions, practices, and barriers regarding COVID-19 vaccine for children: A cross-sectional survey in Ontario, Canada

2023· article· en· W4362582260 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yamna Ali, Pierre‐Philippe Piché‐Renaud, Elahe Karimi‐Shahrbabak, Daniel S. Farrar, Sarah Abu Fadaleh, Sharon Burey, Shaun K. Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsCanadian Paediatric SocietyUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationCentre for Global Health ResearchWestern UniversityPublic Health OntarioHospital for Sick Children
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationCross-sectional studyPandemicDescriptive statisticsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Psychological interventionFamily medicinePediatricsImmunologyDiseaseNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of all age-eligible populations is an important part of the COVID-19 pandemic response. In Ontario, vaccination coverage in 5-to-11-year-old children has remained lower than in other age groups. We sought to understand pediatricians' perception, practices, and barriers to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in children, particularly children aged 5-to-11 years, to inform interventions and promote capacity of pediatricians as vaccinators and vaccination promoters. METHODS: This is a descriptive, cross-sectional study consisting of an online self-administered questionnaire distributed to 1,313 pediatricians in Ontario. Descriptive statistics, including Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests, were performed. RESULTS: In total, 152 Pediatricians responded (11.6% response rate), from February 17, 2022 to March 17, 2022. 78% of respondents were general pediatricians and 22% were pediatric subspecialists. Median years of practice was 17 (8-31), with 68% female, 32% male. Most pediatricians thought it was unlikely that children aged 5-to-11 years would become seriously ill from acute COVID-19 caused by Delta (66%) or Omicron (80%). 92% were very likely to recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 5-to-11 years. COVID-19 vaccine was perceived as safe, with higher safety perception in children aged 5-to-11 compared to 12-to-17 years (p < 0.0001). COVID-19 vaccines were thought to be effective in reducing hospitalization or severe illness, and reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection, with higher perceived effectiveness against Delta compared to Omicron (p < 0.0001). 97% felt confident counselling caregivers of children aged 5-to-11 years on the COVID-19 vaccine. Few pediatricians did not feel confident in accessing resources for health professionals (6%) or for patients/caregivers (12%). CONCLUSIONS: Most surveyed pediatricians were very likely to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 5-to-11-years, perceived COVID-19 vaccines as safe and effective, and felt confident in their COVID-19 vaccine counselling for children aged 5-to-11 years. However, there remains areas for further training and capacity development.

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)0.002
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207