MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401729574 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0304904

Resilience throughout COVID-19: Unmasking the realities of COVID-19 and vaccination facilitators, barriers, and attitudes among Black Canadians

2024· article· en· W4401729574 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Obidimma Ezezika, Toluwalope Adedugbe, Isaac Jonas, Meron Mengistu, Tatyana Graham, Bethelehem Girmay, Yanaminah Thullah, Chris Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsEngineers Without Borders CanadaThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of TorontoWestern University
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsFocus groupFeelingPandemicQualitative researchCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Psychological resilienceHealth equityStigma (botany)Health careFamily medicineMedicinePsychologyPublic healthNursingSocial psychologyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black communities have suffered disproportionately higher numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths in Canada. Recognizing the significance of supporting targeted strategies with vulnerable populations extends beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, as it addresses longstanding health disparities and promotes equitable access to healthcare. The present study investigated 1) experiences with COVID-19, 2) COVID-19's impact, and 3) factors that have influenced COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake among stakeholders and partners from the Federation of Black Canadians' (FBC). We conducted semi-structured interviews with 130 individuals and four focus groups with FBC, including stakeholders and partners, between November 2021 and June 2022. The semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions were conducted virtually over Zoom and lasted about 45 minutes each. Conversations from interviews and focus groups were transcribed and coded professionally using team-based methods. Themes were developed using an inductive-deductive approach and defined through consensus. The deductive approach was based on Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) domains and constructs. First, regarding experiences with COVID-19, 36 codes were identified and mapped onto 13 themes. Prominent themes included 39 participants who experienced highly severe COVID-19 infections, 25 who experienced stigma, and 18 who reported long recovery times. Second, COVID-19 elicited lifestyle changes, with 23 themes emerging from 62 codes. As many as 97 participants expressed feelings of isolation, while 63 reported restricted mobility. Finally, participants discussed determinants that influenced their vaccination decisions, in which 46 barriers and four facilitators were identified and mapped onto nine overarching themes. Themes around the CFIR domains Individuals, Inner Setting, and Outer Setting were most prominent concerning vaccine adoption. As for barriers associated with the constructs limited available resources and low motivation, 55 (41%) and 46 (34%) of participants, respectively, mentioned them most frequently. Other frequently mentioned barriers to COVID-19 vaccines fell under the construct policies & laws, e.g., vaccine mandates as a condition of employment. Overall, these findings provide a comprehensive and contextually rich understanding of pandemic experiences and impact, along with determinants that have influenced participants' vaccination decisions. Furthermore, the data revealed diverse experiences within Black communities, including severe infections, stigma, and vaccine-related challenges, highlighting the importance of targeted interventions, support, and consideration of social determinants of health in addressing these effects.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.006
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 head0.339
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207