MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392953823 · doi:10.2196/50181

Barriers to COVID-19 Vaccination in a Troop of Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team Marines: Observational Study

2024· article· en· W4392953823 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E. Susanne Blazek, Amy Bucher

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsVaccinationObservational studyMilitary personnelPsychologyPsychological interventionMedicinePolitical sciencePsychiatryVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the World Health Organization declared the reluctance to vaccinate despite the availability of vaccination services as one of the top 10 threats to global health. In early 2021, self-reported reluctance to vaccinate among military personnel might have been considered a significant threat to national security. Having a choice architecture that made COVID-19 vaccination optional rather than required for military personnel could have inadvertently undermined military readiness if vaccination uptake did not reach an acceptable threshold. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this observational study was to examine Marines' self-reported reasons for planning to decline the COVID-19 vaccine to understand their barriers to vaccination. METHODS: As the vaccination became available to 1 company of Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) Marines in early 2021, company command required those planning to decline vaccination to write an essay with up to 5 reasons for their choice. These essays provided the data for this study. Qualitative descriptive analysis with elements from grounded theory was used to thematically categorize FAST Marines' written reasons for planning to decline the COVID-19 vaccine into a codebook describing 8 key behavioral determinants. Interrater agreement among 2 qualitatively trained researchers was very good (κ=0.81). RESULTS: A troop of 47 Marines provided 235 reasons why they planned to decline the COVID-19 vaccine. The most frequent reasons were difficulty understanding health information (105/235, 45%), low estimates of risk (33/235, 14%), and fear of physical discomfort (29/235, 12%). Resulting interventions directly targeted Marines' self-reported reasons by reducing barriers (eg, normalized getting the vaccine), increasing vaccine benefits (eg, improved access to base gyms and recreational facilities), and increasing nonvaccine friction (eg, required in writing 5 reasons for declining the vaccine). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the barriers military personnel experience toward COVID-19 vaccination remains critical as vaccine acquisition and availability continue to protect military personnel. Insights from subpopulations like FAST Marines can enhance our ability to identify barriers and appropriate intervention techniques to influence COVID-19 vaccination behaviors.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy→French-language works237,207→