Abstract PR008: Human papillomavirus vaccination knowledge, health beliefs, recommendation receipt, and intentions among unvaccinated Spanish-speaking young adult Hispanic/Latino sexual minority men
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Sexual minority men are at increased risk for human papillomavirus (HPV) infections and subsequent HPV-related health concerns, including anal cancer. HPV vaccination remains an underutilized prevention strategy among sexual minority men, including Hispanic/Latino (H/L) individuals. As part of a mixed methods project, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among Spanish-speaking H/L sexual minority men ages 18-26 to characterize awareness, knowledge, health beliefs, provider recommendation, and HPV vaccine intentions. Multiple in-person and social media strategies were used to recruit participants who self-identified as having had sex with a man and/or being attracted to men and were of H/L ethnicity; able to read, write, and understand Spanish; aged 18-26 years; living in either Florida or Puerto Rico; and with internet access. Data were collected between August 2021-August 2022 using an online survey. Following data cleaning, descriptive analyses using SAS focused on unvaccinated participants (n=102). Results indicated that most participants (86%) were living in Puerto Rico and self-identified as gay (84%). Fifty-six percent reported having heard of the HPV vaccine. Only 19% reported having received a provider recommendation for the HPV vaccine, and less than one-quarter (21%) reported strongly agreeing that people important to them would want them to receive the HPV vaccine. Most individuals (69%) correctly identified that HPV can cause genital warts. However, over half responded either incorrectly or ”do not know” to questions regarding the link between HPV and anal (54%), oral (61%), or penile (65%) cancers. Over half of participants (56%) responded incorrectly or “do not know” to an item about whether most sexually active individuals are at risk for being infected with HPV. Twenty percent responded incorrectly or “do not know” to an item assessing whether men can be infected with HPV. Regarding comparative risk, 28% reported believing themselves to be at average risk for HPV compared to people their age, whereas 14% and 27% reported being at below average risk and at much below average risk, respectively. Most participants (56%) reported they were either not at all or only a little concerned with the safety of the HPV vaccine; however, 25% responded they were very or extremely concerned. Participants reported positive attitudes toward the efficacy of the HPV vaccine in preventing genital warts, penile cancer, and anal cancer. Further, the majority (69%) indicated strongly agreeing or agreeing with an item that assessed their perceived ability to make an appointment to receive the HPV vaccine. Regarding intentions, only 12% reported being very likely to receive the HPV vaccine in the next year, whereas 30% reported being very likely to receive the vaccine at some point in the future. Findings suggest numerous potential malleable targets for future interventions to promote HPV vaccination among H/L young adult sexual minority men, including prompting provider recommendations and addressing patient education needs and health beliefs. Citation Format: Shannon M. Christy, Steven K. Sutton, Mariana Arevalo, Cyril Patra, Cathy D. Meade, Melisa Ramos, Juliana Borrego, Erin Park, Susan T. Vadaparampil, Julio C. Jimenez, Julian Sanchez, Melissa Marzan-Rodriguez. Human papillomavirus vaccination knowledge, health beliefs, recommendation receipt, and intentions among unvaccinated Spanish-speaking young adult Hispanic/Latino sexual minority men [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 16th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2023 Sep 29-Oct 2;Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023;32(12 Suppl):Abstract nr PR008.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».