MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749969842 · doi:10.1016/j.epidem.2017.08.001

Modelling multi-site transmission of the human papillomavirus and its impact on vaccination effectiveness

2017· article· en· W2749969842 on OpenAlexafffund
Philippe Lemieux-Mellouki, Mélanie Drolet, Mark Jit, G Gingras, Marc Brisson

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health EnglandNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNational Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research UnitLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
KeywordsSex organVaccinationHerd immunityTransmission (telecommunications)ImmunityPopulationImmunologyBiologyMedicineVirologyImmune systemEnvironmental healthGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Previous HPV models have only included genital transmission, when evidence suggests that transmission between several anatomical sites occurs. We compared model predictions of population-level HPV vaccination effectiveness against genital HPV16 infection in women, using a 1) uni-site (genital site), and a 2) multi-site model (genital and one extragenital site). METHODS: We developed a uni-site and a multi-site deterministic HPV transmission model, assuming natural immunity was either site-specific or systemic. Both models were calibrated to genital HPV16 prevalence (5%-7.5%), whilst the multi-site model was calibrated to HPV16 prevalence representative of oral (0%-1%) and anal (1%-7.5%) sites. For each model, we identified 2500 parameter sets that fit endemic genital and extragenital prevalences within pre-specified target ranges. In the Base-case analysis, vaccination was girls-only with 40% coverage. Vaccine efficacy was 100% for all sites with lifetime protection. The outcome was the relative reduction in genital HPV16 prevalence among women at post-vaccination equilibrium (RRprev). RRprev was stratified by extragenital prevalence pre-vaccination. RESULTS: Under assumptions of site-specific immunity, RRprev with the multi-site model was generally greater than with the uni-site model. Differences between the uni-site and multi-site models were greater when transmission from the extragenital site to the genital site was high. Under assumptions of systemic immunity, the multi-site and uni-site models yielded similar RRprev in the scenario without immunity after extragenital infection. In the scenario with systemic immunity after extragenital infection, the multi-site model yielded lower predictions of RRprev than the uni-site model. CONCLUSIONS: Modelling genital-site only transmission may overestimate vaccination impact if extragenital infections contribute to systemic natural immunity or underestimate vaccination impact if a high proportion of genital infections originate from extragenital infections. Under current understanding of heterosexual HPV transmission and immunity, a substantial bias from using uni-site models in predicting vaccination effectiveness against genital HPV infection is unlikely to occur.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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