MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116021620 · doi:10.1136/bmj.g1458

Effectiveness of quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine for the prevention of cervical abnormalities: case-control study nested within a population based screening programme in Australia

2014· article· en· W2116021620 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Elizabeth P. Crowe, Nirmala Pandeya, Julia Brotherton, Annette J. Dobson, Steve Kisely, Stephen B. Lambert, David C. Whiteman

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAustralian Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilUniversity of QueenslandChildren's Health FoundationAustralian GovernmentQueensland HealthChildren's Medical Research
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioVaccinationConfidence intervalGynecologyObstetricsPopulationCervical cancerCase-control studyCytologyInternal medicineImmunologyPathologyCancerEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To measure the effectiveness of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine against cervical abnormalities four years after implementation of a nationally funded vaccination programme in Queensland, Australia. DESIGN: Case-control analysis of linked administrative health datasets. SETTING: Queensland, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Women eligible for free vaccination (aged 12-26 years in 2007) and attending for their first cervical smear test between April 2007 and March 2011. High grade cases were women with histologically confirmed high grade cervical abnormalities (n = 1062) and "other cases" were women with any other abnormality at cytology or histology (n = 10,887). Controls were women with normal cytology (n = 96,404). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Exposure odds ratio (ratio of odds of antecedent vaccination (one, two, or three vaccine doses compared with no doses) among cases compared with controls), vaccine effectiveness ((1-adjusted odds ratio) × 100), and number needed to vaccinate to prevent one cervical abnormality at first screening round. We stratified by four age groups adjusted for follow-up time, year of birth, and measures of socioeconomic status and remoteness. The primary analysis concerned women whose first ever smear test defined their status as a case or a control. RESULTS: The adjusted odds ratio for exposure to three doses of HPV vaccine compared with no vaccine was 0.54 (95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.67) for high grade cases and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.70) for other cases compared with controls with normal cytology, equating to vaccine effectiveness of 46% and 34%, respectively. The adjusted numbers needed to vaccinate were 125 (95% confidence interval 97 to 174) and 22 (19 to 25), respectively. The adjusted exposure odds ratios for two vaccine doses were 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.98) for high grade cases and 0.79 (0.74 to 0.85) for other cases, equating to vaccine effectiveness of 21%. CONCLUSION: The quadrivalent HPV vaccine conferred statistically significant protection against cervical abnormalities in young women who had not started screening before the implementation of the vaccination programme in Queensland, Australia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations221
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207