MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396586639 · doi:10.1177/08445621241251711

Consequences of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Healthcare Providers During the First 10 Months of Vaccine Availability: Scoping Review

2024· article· en· W4396586639 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Caitlyn D. Wilpstra, Sherry Morrell, Noeman Mirza, Jody Ralph

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Nursing Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHealth careMedicineBusinessVirologyEconomicsOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)Economic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers (HCPs)-including nurses-have played important roles in the vaccination effort. It is expected that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCPs has numerous consequences; however, the scope of these consequences and their impacts on providers, patients, and the broader healthcare system remained unclear. PURPOSE: To identify existing and emerging evidence to understand the state of knowledge of the consequences of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCPs. METHODS: A scoping review was completed based upon the JBI scoping review methodology. The databases searched included OVID Medline, EBSCOhost CINAHL, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Source, ProQuest APA PsycInfo, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. The final literature search was completed on June 2, 2022. Studies were screened and retrieved based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria using Covidence reference management software. Data extraction followed criteria recommended in the JBI scoping review framework with additional relevant variables identified by the authors. RESULTS: A total of 33 sources were included in the review. Consequences of HCP COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were grouped under three themes and seven subthemes. Consequences affecting HCPs included health-related, psychosocial, and employment-related consequences. Consequences affecting patients pertained to COVID-19 vaccination communication and COVID-19 vaccination practices of HCPs. Consequences to the healthcare system involved consequences to coworkers and employment/attendance/staffing-related consequences. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare provider COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was found to have numerous consequences. By understanding the scope and extent of these consequences, healthcare leaders, researchers, and HCPs can work together to protect providers, patients, and healthcare systems.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.091
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.091
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Nursing ResearchSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207