MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Digital Health Literacy, Vaccine Information Sources, and Vaccine Acceptance Among Parents in Ontario: Quantitative Findings From a Mixed Methods Study

2024· article· en· W6941799275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholar Commons (University of South Carolina) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)VaccinationHealth careDigital healthHealth literacyPublic healthHealth communicationLiteracy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parents make important vaccination decisions for their children and many variables affect parents' decisions to accept or decline vaccines. Parents are tasked with locating, understanding, and applying information to inform health decisions often using online resources; however, the digital health literacy levels of parents are unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate parents' digital health literacy levels, their sources for vaccine information, and analyze how demographics, digital health literacy, health literacy, parental attitudes and vaccine beliefs, trust, and vaccine information sources predict vaccine acceptance. Quantitative findings of a mixed methods study that examined parental vaccine decision making across the continuum of vaccine hesitant to vaccine accepting is reported. An online survey of parents of young children living in Ontario, Canada was conducted in 2022. Multiple linear regression determined predictors of vaccine acceptance. 219 participants completed the survey and on average reported adequate digital health literacy skill. Healthcare providers were reported as the most commonly used source of vaccine information. Two models were retained that predicted vaccine acceptance, both models predicted about 50% of the variability in vaccine acceptance. Model A identified that trust predicted parent vaccine acceptance and model B identified that digital health literacy, and the vaccine information sources healthcare providers, family and friends, and alternate healthcare providers predicted vaccine acceptance. Family and friends and alternate healthcare providers negatively predicted vaccine acceptance. Most parents in our study had high levels of digital health literacy. Opportunities exist for further research and policy change focused on trust at a systemic public health level. While clinical level implications included the importance of healthcare providers as a vaccine information source and adequate digital health literacy to facilitate parental vaccine decision making. Continued efforts to develop awareness on the importance of digital health literacy among the public and healthcare providers is needed, including further research on the digital health literacy levels of Canadians.

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)0.000
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 score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.903

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholar Commons (University of South Carolina)Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207