MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388139131 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3360308/v1

Parents attitudes towards the No Jab No Play legislation in Western Australia: a mixed methods study

2023· preprint· en· W4388139131 on OpenAlexaff
Sharyn Burns, Ranila Bhoyroo, Justine E. Leavy, Jonine Jancey, Hanna Saltis, Lynne Millar, Jacqueline Hendriks, Linda Portsmouth, Jenny Tohotoa, Christina Pollard

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationThematic analysisMultimethodologyPsychologyQualitative researchMandateQualitative propertyMedicinePolitical scienceSociologyPedagogyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Mandates provided a relatively cost-effective strategy to increase vaccinate rates. Since 2014, five Australian states have implemented No Jab No Play (NJPlay) policies that require children to be fully immunised to attend early childhood education and childcare services. In Western Australia, where this study was conducted, NJNPlay legislation was enacted in 2019. This research forms part of a broader study to explore the influence of the NJNPlay legislation on the decision to vaccinate; and the impact of the NJNPlay legislation in Western Australia, two years after its implementation. Methods: This mixed-methods study used an online parent/carer survey (n = 261) representing 427 children and in-depth interviews (n = 18) to investigate: 1) the influence of the NJNP legislation on decision to vaccinate; and 2) the financial and emotional impacts of NJNP legislation. Descriptive and bivariate tests were used to analyse the survey data and open-ended questions and interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis to capture the experience and the reality of participants. Results: Approximately 60% of parents intended to vaccinate their child. Parents who had decided not to vaccinate their child/ren were significantly more likely to experience financial [p < 0.001] and emotional impacts [p < 0.001], compared to those who chose to vaccinate because of the mandate. Qualitative data were divided with around half of participants supporting childhood immunisation and NJNPlay with others discussing concerns. The themes a) belief in the importance of vaccination and ease of access, b) individual and community protection, and c) vaccine effectiveness, safety and alternatives help understand how parents beliefs and access may influence vaccination uptake. Unintended impacts of NJNPlay included: a) lack of choice, pressure and coercion to vaccinate; b) policy and community level stigma and discrimination; c) financial and career impacts; and d) loss of education opportunities. Conclusion: Parents’ appreciation of funded immunisation programs and mandates which enhance individual and community protection was evident. However, for others unintended consequences of the mandate resulted in significant social, emotional, financial and educational impacts. Long-term evidence highlights the positive impact of immunisation programs. Opinions of impacted families should be considered to alleviate mental health stressors.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.327
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy→French-language works237,207→