MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396844302 · doi:10.1016/j.jvacx.2024.100498

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in Canadian blood donors: Insight into donor representativeness of the general population

2024· article· en· W4396844302 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sheila F. O’Brien, Mindy Goldman, Behrouz Ehsani‐Moghaddam, Wenli Fan, Lori Osmond, Chantale Pambrun, Steven J. Drews

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine X · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaQueen's UniversityCanadian Blood ServicesUniversity of Ottawa
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsVaccinationMedicinePopulationPandemicImmunologyAntibodyVirologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Blood donors world-wide were indispensable for monitoring anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies generated by infection and vaccination during the pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, donor vaccination behaviours were under-studied. We aimed to compare the percentage of Canadian blood donors with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination antibodies with the percentage of the general population who received at least one dose of vaccine each month during initial vaccine deployment. We also report donor attitudes towards SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Methods: Canadian blood donors were randomly selected for SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing over 2021 (N = 165,240). The percentage of donor samples with vaccination antibodies were compared with the percentage of general population who received at least one dose of vaccine in each month of 2021 except February. A random sample of Canadian blood donors were surveyed about vaccination intent and attitudes (N = 4,558 participated, 30.4 % response rate). Results: The percentages of the general population vaccinated and donors with vaccination antibodies increased from 1 % to over 90 %. General population vaccination was greater early in vaccine deployment than donors (p < 0.05), greater in donors than the general population by mid-2021 (p < 0.05) but they were similar by the end of 2021. While 52.6 % of surveyed donors had received vaccine in May 2021, a further 41.1 % intended to when eligible. Most donors thought COVID-19 infection could be serious (83.5 %) and that it was important to be vaccinated even if previously infected (77.8 %). Conclusion: Early pandemic vaccine prioritization to at-risk individuals and healthcare workers gave rise to higher general population vaccination percentages, while donors had higher vaccine antibody percentages as vaccine was deployed to progressively younger age groups. Since blood donors may be more willing to receive vaccination, under pandemic conditions they may be valuable for monitoring vaccination-induced seroprevalence.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccine XSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207