Did inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination resolve over time? Insights from the Canadian Community Health Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage emerged during the vaccination campaign. This study aimed to assess whether inequalities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage in Canada persisted or resolved throughout the vaccine rollout. METHODS: Using data from the Canadian Community Health Survey, the analysis included people 18 and older from all ten provinces. Vaccination coverage for at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine was determined in three periods: June 2021-February 2022 (n = 28,182), February-June 2022 (n = 25,742), and July-December 2022 (n = 23,119). Statistically significant gaps across groups were assessed using non-overlapping 95 % confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: In June 2021-February 2022, coverage for at least one dose (95 % CI) was 85.5 % (79.0-90.3) for off-reserve First Nations people, 85.7 % (79.6-90.1) for Métis people, 79.6 % (72.1-85.4) for Black people, 83.0 % (72.9-89.9) for Arab people, and 92.9 % (92.3-93.5) for White people. By July-December 2022, coverage was 87.4 % (80.2-92.3), 90.5 % (85.5-93.8), 92.1 % (87.2-95.2), 95.6 % (90.6-98.0), and 95.1 % (94.5-95.6), respectively, in the same populations. The gap between off-reserve First Nations and White people remained significant, at 7.4 percentage points (pp.) in the first period and 7.6 pp. in the third period. As for Métis and White people, the gap decreased from 7.3 pp. to 4.6 pp. In the first period, the gap compared to White people was 13.4 pp. for Black people and 9.9 pp. for Arab people, and resolved in the third period. Significant gaps also remained across age groups, levels of educational attainment, household income, for those residing in rural areas, those living with children under 12 years old, and those without a regular healthcare provider. CONCLUSION: Despite efforts to address them, several inequalities persisted throughout the vaccine rollout, underscoring the need for refined strategies to reach all population segments. As Canadian vaccination registries do not collect sociodemographic data beyond date of birth, sex and place of residence, survey data is needed to measure these disparities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".