MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185542666 · doi:10.1071/hc10190

HPV/cervical cancer vaccination: parental preferences on age, place and information needs

2010· article· en· W2185542666 on OpenAlexaff
Sally B. Rose, Beverley Lawton, Tolotea Lanumata, Merilyn Hibma, Michael G. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Primary Health Care · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaccinationDaughterReceiptMedicineCervical cancerEthnic groupFamily medicineHuman papillomavirusPopulationDemographyInformation needsGerontologyCancerEnvironmental healthImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: A vaccine against cervical cancer is available in New Zealand through school and primary care for girls aged 12-18 years. Factors that might increase or hinder widespread uptake by the target population need to be identified. AIM: To describe parents' preferences on where their daughter(s) receive the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, at what age, and their information needs. METHODS: 3123 questionnaires were distributed to parents recruited from 14 schools in 2008, prior to the start of the school-based vaccination programme. Outcome measures were: preferred age and place of vaccination, and information needs of parents and their daughters. Tests for significance were performed to determine whether parental preferences differed by ethnic group (Maori, Pacific, New Zealand European and 'Other'). RESULTS: A 25% response rate was achieved (769/3123). Receipt of the HPV vaccine in a clinic setting was preferred by 40% of parents; 25% preferred vaccination at school. Fifty percent preferred vaccination to occur at age 13 or older; 28% thought ages 10, 11 or 12 appropriate. One in three parents wanted more information and 65% said they would seek information from their family doctor before deciding on the vaccine for their daughter(s). DISCUSSION: We suggest that a programme delivered jointly in primary care and school settings, that is appropriately resourced for follow-up and information-sharing, would increase vaccine coverage. The rationale for vaccination at age 12 needs to be made clear to parents and evidence-based information needs to be delivered appropriately to parents and girls.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Primary Health CareSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207