MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414311332 · doi:10.1016/j.jvacx.2025.100720

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale: Psychometric properties and validation among pregnant and breastfeeding persons and parents

2025· article· en· W4414311332 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Heidi Sze Lok Fan, Edmond Pui Hang Choi, Elizabeth Keys, Rishma Chooniedass, Stephanie Masina, Alex Halonen, Kalysse Mantai, Marie Tarrant

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine X · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalInterior HealthUniversity of Manitoba
FundersGenome British ColumbiaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsBreastfeedingConfirmatory factor analysisConstruct validityExploratory factor analysisScale (ratio)Psychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) was developed by the World Health Organization's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) to examine parents' vaccine hesitancy toward childhood vaccines. The VHS has been validated and modified to assess vaccine hesitancy toward specific vaccines, including influenza and human papillomavirus vaccines, but not the COVID-19 vaccine. The objective of this study is to validate a modified VHS for the COVID-19 vaccine among pregnant and breastfeeding persons, and parents of children under 12 years of age. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in British Columbia, Canada from October to December 2021. A total of 1510 participants including pregnant and breastfeeding persons, and parents of children <12 years of age were included in the analysis. Participants completed questionnaires tailored to their respective groups based on self-identification. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess the original VHS structure. The data were then randomly split into training and validation sets for exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Factor structure, internal construct validity, internal consistency, and known-group validity were evaluated. The original VHS model showed a poor fit. Exploratory factor analysis identified a revised one-factor model (VHS-COVID19), which showed satisfactory fit in the validation sample for pregnant participants (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.999; root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.041; standardized root mean squared residual [SRMR] = 0.008; Tucker-Lewis Index [TLI] = 0.997), breastfeeding participants (CFI = 0.995; RMAEA = 0.089; SRMR = 0.006; TLI = 0.990) and parent participants (CFI = 0.995; RMAEA = 0.080; SRMR = 0.004; TLI = 0.992). The revised scale comprised five items for pregnant and breastfeeding participants and six for parent participants . VHS-COVID19 showed high internal construct validity and reliability. The VHS-COVID19 shows adequate psychometric performance for assessing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant, breastfeeding persons, and parents. It is easy to administer and can be used by healthcare providers to rapidly assess vaccine hesitancy of the targeted population in clinical settings. • We validated a modified Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) for COVID-19 among pregnant, breastfeeding persons, and parents. • A concise and refined version of VHS shows excellent psychometric performance. • The revised scale is easy to apply, enabling healthcare providers to assess vaccine hesitancy in clinical settings rapidly.

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)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.299
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccine XSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207