MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2748700663 · doi:10.1002/pon.4476

Exploring views regarding targeted HPV vaccination in young men who have sex with men and their healthcare professionals

2017· article· en· W2748700663 on OpenAlexaff
Gillian Prue, Carrie Flannagan, Jo Kesten, Samuel WD Merriel, Gilla K. Shapiro, Zeev Rosberger

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCancer Research UK
KeywordsHealth professionalsMen who have sex with menHealth careVaccinationMedicineFamily medicinePsychologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Political scienceVirologySyphilis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is no public human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme for boys in the UK. As men who have sex with men (MSM) may be at greater risk for HPV-associated cancers, they have been offered targeted HPV vaccination at Genitourinary Medicine (GUM) clinics since 2016. A mixed method study included questionnaires and focus groups with young (16–24 years) MSM, and an online questionnaire with GPs and GUM HCPs to investigate HPV knowledge and attitudes to targeted vaccination. GPs were included given their potential to vaccinate young MSM before sexual debut. T-tests and logistic regression were used to analyse quantitative data and a thematic analysis was performed to evaluate qualitative data. 18 MSM (Mage = 20) and 87 HCPs (Mage = 41) participated. Most MSM were aware of HPV (55.6%), but only 16.7% discussed HPV vaccination with their HCPs. MSM focus groups revealed vaccination barriers including ‘unfamiliar and clinical’ conversations about their sexuality with HCPs. MSM preferred being offered the vaccine by HCPs rather than requesting it and suggested universal school-based vaccination may be more accessible. GPs were less likely than GUM HCPs to believe there was sufficient evidence for vaccinating MSM (OR = 0.07 95%CI = 0.01,0.59); less likely to have skills to identify MSM who may benefit (OR = 0.03 95%CI = 0.01,0.15); and less confident recommending young MSM vaccination (OR = 0.06 95%CI = 0.02,0.21). To prevent HPV-associated cancers in MSM, greater education and support is needed targeting MSM (e.g. dissemination of information about the targeted programme and GPs offering vaccination), but GPs may need education and implementation support for this.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.205
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester)Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207