Acceptance and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic posed a unique set of risks to pregnant women and pregnant people. SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy is associated with increased risk of severe illness and adverse perinatal outcomes. However, evidence regarding the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy shows safety and efficacy. Despite eligibility and recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women and pregnant people in Canada, uptake remains lower compared to the general population, warranting exploration of influencing factors. The COVERED study, a national prospective cohort, utilized web-based surveys to collect data from pregnant women and pregnant people across Canada on COVID-19 vaccine attitudes, uptake, and hesitancy factors from July 2021 to December 2023. Survey questions were informed by validated tools including the WHO Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Of 1093 respondents who were pregnant at the time of the survey, 87.7% received or intended to receive a COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. TPB variables such as positive attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines (OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.08–1.14), direct social norms, and indirect social norms were significantly associated with vaccine acceptance. Perceived vaccine risks, assessed by the WHO VHS, were greater in those not accepting of the vaccine. Our study identified several key factors that play a role in vaccine uptake: perceived vaccine risks and safety and social norms. These findings may guide public health recommendations and prenatal vaccine counseling strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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 teacher head, 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".