MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7072225286

Utility of the theory of planned behaviour in health services research when examining the intentions of immunization provider behaviour / by Jill Fediurek.

2017· other· en· W7072225286 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of planned behaviorHealth carePublic healthPopulationHealth belief modelMandateTheory of reasoned actionPopulation healthHealth promotion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will demonstrate the need for public health involvement with health services
\nresearch in order to effectively meet its' mandate for achieving population health.
\nThe success of our public health programs requires working effectively with other health service
\nproviders to achieve desired outcomes. The goal of the vaccine preventable disease program in
\nOntario will be used to illustrate the importance of health services research in accomplishing the
\ndesired outcomes. In Ontario, immunizations are primarily administered outside of the public
\nhealth domain with approximately 85% of immunizations being administered in primary
\nhealthcare settings such as family physician offices or community health care centers. How do
\npublic health professionals affect immunization provider behaviour that is performed by
\nindependent practitioners in other healthcare sectors? The answer lies with health services
\nresearchers who wish to predict and understand specific behaviour in health care professionals.
\nKnowledge transfer or implementation research which focuses on investigating the
\nuptake of evidence-based practice in health care professionals has been conducted through
\nquestionnaires based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour (Francis et ah, 2004). The importance
\nof immunization and the goal of the vaccine preventable disease program in Ontario will be
\npresented. The theoretical framework of the Theory of Planned Behaviour will be examined to
\nhiglilight the constructs of the theory and how they interact with one another. Next, the
\napplication of the Theory of Planned Behaviour as a theoretical model on which to base the
\ndesign of a questionnaire to assess health care provider's immunization behaviour will be
\nreviewed. A survey instrument (jointly developed by the Communicable Diseases Epidemiology
\nServices of the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control and the Clinical Trials Research Centre from Dalhousie University) to measure the psychological determinants of immunization
\nintentions of Canadian Immunization Providers will be examined to detennine its usefulness for
\npublic health. Finally recommendations for future research will be presented in order to identify
\npriorities for health service research to effectively advance the goals and objectives of staff
\nworking in the vaccine preventable diseases program area in Ontario.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)French-language works237,207