Prevalence of Human Papillomavirus Infection and Associated Risk Factors in Young Women in Brazil, Canada, and the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the prevalence of cervical human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and risk factors in young women from Brazil, Canada, and the USA. Cross-sectional study in 3204 healthy women, aged 15 to 25 years. Cervical samples were collected for cytology and for HPV DNA detection (SPF 10-LiPA 25 system). Serum samples were collected for the measurement of HPV-16 and HPV-18 antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Risk factors were obtained through a questionnaire. Overall, 26.6% of women had DNA detected for at least 1 HPV type. The prevalence for oncogenic HPV types was 21.7% (25% in Brazil, 16.9% in Canada, and 19.1% in the USA). HPV-16 was the most prevalent oncogenic type (5.2%). The next most common oncogenic HPV types were 51 (3.3%), 52 (3.3%), 31 (2.9%), 66 (2.3%), and 39 (2.0%). Multiple oncogenic types were detected in one-third of the infections. The prevalence of HPV-16 and/or HPV-18 infections detected by DNA and/or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was 24.8%. The majority of women (85%) had a normal cervical cytology. Sexual behavior was the main determinant for HPV-16/18 infections and squamous intraepithelial lesions. The prevalence of HPV oncogenic infections was high and linked to sexual behavior. Strategies to reduce the burden of oncogenic HPV infection, such as prophylactic vaccination programs, are likely to impact the burden of disease due to cervical precancer and cancer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".