MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390269108 · doi:10.36922/ijps.479

What drives the willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19 in South Africa?

2023· article· en· W4390269108 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yemi Adewoyin, Clifford Odimegwu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Population Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research FoundationInternational Development Research CentreUK Research and InnovationStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsLogistic regressionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)OddsOdds ratioDemographyPopulationMedicineDiseaseVaccinationDescriptive statisticsEnvironmental healthCoronavirusVirologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)StatisticsInternal medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The willingness to get vaccinated in South Africa is among the highest in the world, measuring at 76%. This study investigated the impact of individual risk beliefs, self-reported health status, and familiarity with someone with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the willingness to get vaccinated in South Africa. Data were obtained from the Wave 5 of the South African National Income Dynamics Study – Coronavirus Rapid Mobile Survey. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression. More than 53% of the population believed that they were not at risk of COVID-19; 71.8% believed that they were in good health; and 31.6% knew someone with COVID-19. Beliefs (odds ratio [OR]: 1.287), health status (OR: 1.064), and COVID-19 case familiarity (OR: 1.034) were associated with willingness to get vaccinated. Other associations remained positive in the adjusted model. The relationship between case familiarity and willingness to get vaccinated shows that knowing someone who died of COVID-19 or suffered from the discomfort induced by the disease may drive other individuals to get vaccinated.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Population StudiesSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207