Parental Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviours towards Human Papillomavirus Vaccination for Their Children: A Systematic Review from 2001 to 2011
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives. A systematic review of parental surveys about HPV and/or child HPV vaccination to understand parental knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour before and after FDA approval of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine and the bivalent HPV vaccine. Search Strategy. Searches were conducted using electronic databases limited to published studies between 2001 and 2011. Findings. The percentage of parents who heard about HPV rose over time (from 60% in 2005 to 93% in 2009), as did their appreciation for the HPV infection and cervical cancer link (from 70% in 2003 to 91% in 2011). During the FDA approval, there was a stronger vaccine awareness but it has waned. The same pattern is seen with parents whose children received the HPV vaccine (peak at 84% in 2010 and now 36% in 2011) or the intention to vaccinate (peak at 80% in 2008 and now 41% in 2011). Conclusions. Parents had safety concerns and wanted more information their physician from to recommend and to confidently HPV vaccinate their children.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 it