MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765504278 · doi:10.1186/s40463-017-0237-8

Practices regarding human Papillomavirus counseling and vaccination in head and neck cancer: A Canadian physician questionnaire

2017· article· en· W2765504278 on OpenAlexaffabout
Scott R. Anderson, André Isaac, Caroline C. Jeffery, Joan Robinson, Daniela Migliarese Isaac, Christina Korownyk, Vincent L. Biron, Hadi Seikaly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVaccinationHead and neck cancerCervical cancerTransmission (telecommunications)Family medicineHuman papillomavirusOtorhinolaryngologyCancerDiseaseHPV infectionAnal cancerGynecologyInternal medicineImmunologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) has recently been implicated as a causative agent in a rapidly growing number of oropharyngeal cancers. Emerging literature supports the hypothesis that HPV vaccination may protect against HPV-related head and neck cancer (HNC) in addition to HPV-related cervical and anogenital disease. While the association between HPV infection and cervical cancer is widely understood, its relation to HNC is less well known. The purpose of this study was to better understand HPV counseling practices for infection and vaccination in relation to HNC of primary care physicians (PCPs), Obstetricians/Gynecologists (OBGYNs), and Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgeons (OHNSs) in Canada. METHODS: A Canada-wide electronic questionnaire regarding counseling practices on HPV infection, transmission, and vaccination was designed and distributed to PCPs, OBGYNs, and OHNSs across Canada through electronic and paper-based methods. Basic Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses. RESULTS: In total, 337 physicians responded (239 family physicians, 51 OHNSs, 30 OBGYNs, and 17 pediatricians). Three out of four PCPs reported routine counseling of their patients regarding HPV infection, transmission, and vaccination. Among this group, 68% reported "never" or "rarely" counseling patients that HPV can cause HNC. The most commonly reported reason that PCPs cited for not counseling was a lack of knowledge. The majority of OHNSs (81%) and OBGYNs (97%) counseled patients regarding HPV infection, transmission, and vaccination. However, very few OHNSs (10%) regularly counseled patients with HPV-related HNC about HPV-related anogenital cancer. Similarly, very few OBGYNs (18%) regularly counseled patients with HPV related cervical/anogenital cancer about HPV related HNC. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of counseling on HPV infection, transmission, and vaccination in relation to HNC among PCPs is low. The most common reason is a lack of knowledge. Specialists rarely counsel patients with confirmed HPV-related cancer about other HPV-related malignancies. More research is needed on the relationship between different HPV-related cancers in order to better inform counseling practices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck SurgerySame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207