MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410609415 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0323186

A scoping review protocol on childhood immunization reminder strategies available to parents in Canada and the United States of America

2025· review· en· W4410609415 on OpenAlexaffabout
Matilda Anim-Larbi, Vivian Puplampu, Sithokozile Maposa, Akram Khayatzadeh‐Mahani, Mary Chipanshi

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsLibrary and Archives CanadaUniversity of SaskatchewanPrince Albert Grand CouncilUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationMeaslesThematic analysisFamily medicineImmunizationPopulationInclusion (mineral)Data extractionMeasles vaccineMEDLINEVaccine-preventable diseasesGrey literaturePediatricsEnvironmental healthQualitative researchPsychologyImmunologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Vaccine-preventable diseases continue to cause morbidity and mortality despite the introduction of childhood immunizations. Recent media reports from Canada and the United States of America (USA) have highlighted a rise in childhood illnesses like measles, which could have been prevented with vaccines. Parents play a pivotal role in ensuring their children receive timely vaccinations. Immunization reminders can help parents who forget or miss vaccination appointments. In the USA, current literature indicates that Black children have lower vaccination rates than other racialized children and vaccine reminders may improve measles vaccine uptake among Black parents. However, there is limited data in Canada on vaccine uptake in children of Black parents, with evidence suggesting vaccine hesitancy among the Black population. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to map out existing literature on immunization reminder strategies among parents to identify their impact in improving childhood vaccination rates and promoting child health. INCLUSION CRITERIA: The review will include studies conducted in Canada and the United States of America that focus on immunization reminders for parents who have children under six years and published in English between 2015 and 2025. METHODS: Database and hand-searching of journals and gray literature will be carried out to retrieve pertinent articles. Studies that meet the inclusion criteria will be eligible for selection. The process of selecting eligible studies will then be summarized on a PRISMA-ScR chart. Collated in data-extraction tables will be authorship information, publication date, methods and findings. The findings, key arguments and themes will be analyzed using a thematic analysis and summarized using a narrative summary. CONCLUSION: This review will contribute to the existing knowledge on parental preferences for vaccine reminder strategies and their usefulness in increasing childhood vaccination rates. The findings will inform and improve public health strategies aimed at boosting vaccine uptake among children.

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)0.095
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.112
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0950.112
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.011
Bibliometrics0.0280.024
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0960.016

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy→French-language works237,207→