The role of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related stigma on HPV vaccine decision-making among college males
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
OBJECTIVE: The goals of the present study are (1) to identify sociodemographic and psychosocial predictors of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related stigma and (2) to examine the relationship between HPV-related stigma in predicting HPV vaccine decision-making among college males. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred and eighty college males aged 18-26 from 3 Canadian universities were recruited from September 2013 to April 2014. METHODS: Participants completed a self-report survey assessing HPV-related stigma, psychosocial predictors of HPV-related stigma, and HPV vaccine decision-making. The results were analyzed using variance analyses and linear regressions. RESULTS: Ethnicity, province of residence, and perceived severity of HPV were found to significantly influence HPV-related stigma. In addition, HPV-related stigma was higher in those unaware of the availability of the HPV vaccine for males. CONCLUSIONS: Promotion efforts should concentrate on Asian minorities and should avoid HPV severity messaging, as these may lead to higher HPV-related stigma, which in turn may act as a barrier to vaccination.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it