MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414628590 · doi:10.3390/idr17050122

Profile, Infection, and Vaccination Uptake: A Cohort of Canadian Retail Workers During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

2025· article· en· W4414628590 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mathieu Thériault, Kim Santerre, Nicholas Brousseau, Samuel Rochette, Rabeea F. Omar, Joelle N. Pelletier, Caroline Gilbert, Jean‐François Masson, Mariana Baz, Denis Boudreau, Sylvie Trottier

Bibliographic record

VenueInfectious Disease Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de PointeUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalPROTEOInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaccinationCohortConfidence intervalPandemicHazard ratioCohort studyBooster doseBooster (rocketry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: Retail workers may have been at an increased risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic. To better understand this group, we set up a longitudinal cohort to document the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccination uptake and to study immune response. Methods: Participants were enrolled between 20 April and 22 October 2021 and attended up to 5 visits over 48 weeks. Information collected was: participant characteristics, SARS-CoV-2 detection tests performed, COVID-19 symptoms, and vaccination (influenza and SARS-CoV-2). Findings: We included 304 participants aged 18 to 75; of those, 117 had a first positive SARS-CoV-2 test, mostly (85.5%) during Omicron wave. Forty-two (13.8%) participants got seasonal influenza vaccine within the year (2020–2021) prior to the first visit, and 95.9% had received the primary series of 2 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine by the beginning of Omicron wave. Participants vaccinated for influenza (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 2.48; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.54–3.98) and older patients (aHR 2.39; 95% CI: 1.40–4.10), were more likely to get a first booster of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine compared to those who did not receive influenza vaccine. In contrast, participants who traveled (aHR 0,62; 95% CI: 0.43–0.91) or participated in frequent gatherings (aHR 0.58; 95% CI: 0.39–0.85) were less likely to be boosted. Conclusions: Variations in vaccine uptake that are usually observed within populations had little effect on completion of the primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccine series. However, these differences became apparent for booster doses, at a period during which most infections in this cohort were recorded.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfectious Disease ReportsSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207