A RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW OF THE SCHOOL-BASED HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS (HPV) IMMUNIZATION PROGRAM: EVALUATING THE EFFECTS OF PUBLIC HEALTH NURSING ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES WITH SCHOOLS, PARENTS AND YOUTH ON HPV VACCINE UPTAKE IN GREATER HALIFAX
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nova Scotia has the highest rate of cervical cancer, predominantly attributed to the Human Papillomavirus (HPV). In 2007, the HPV vaccine was approved and a successful school-based program was implemented. Little is known however, which strategies used by public health nurses (PHNs) helps improve vaccine uptake.\n\nMETHODS: A retrospective, exploratory correlation study examined the relationship between school-based PHN strategies, and uptake of HPV vaccine. \n\nRESULTS: HPV vaccine initiation was significantly associated with PHNs providing reminder calls for: consent return (p = .017) and missed school clinic (p = .004); HPV education to teachers (p < .001), and a thank-you to teachers (p < .001). Completion of the HPV series was associated with consents being returned to the students' teacher (p = .003), and a PHN being assigned to a school (p = .025).\n\nCONCLUSIONS: These findings will help guide PHN’s best practice for optimal uptake of the HPV vaccine.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".