MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2818364414 · doi:10.1097/olq.0000000000000731

Non–Vaccine-Type Human Papillomavirus Prevalence After Vaccine Introduction: No Evidence for Type Replacement but Evidence for Cross-Protection

2017· article· en· W2818364414 on OpenAlexaff
Mónica Saccucci, Eduardo L. Franco, Lili Ding, David I. Bernstein, Darron R. Brown, Jessica A. Kahn

Bibliographic record

VenueSexually Transmitted Diseases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalLogistic regressionDemographyCross-sectional studyHuman papillomavirusVaccine efficacyVaccinationVirologyImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We examined non-vaccine-type human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence in a community before and during the first 8 years after vaccine introduction, to assess for (1) type replacement with any non-vaccine-type HPV and (2) cross-protection with non-vaccine types genetically related to vaccine-type HPV. METHODS: Sexually experienced 13- to- 26-year-old women were recruited for 3 cross-sectional studies from 2006 to 2014 (N = 1180). Outcome variables were as follows: (1) prevalence of at least 1 of 32 anogenital non-vaccine-type HPVs and (2) prevalence of at least 1 HPV type genetically related to HPV-16 and HPV-18. We determined changes in proportions of non-vaccine-type HPV prevalence across the study waves using logistic regression with propensity score inverse probability weighting. RESULTS: Vaccine initiation rates increased from 0% to 71.3%. Logistic regression demonstrated that from 2006 to 2014, there was no increase in non-vaccine-type HPV among vaccinated women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.42), but an increase among unvaccinated women (AOR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.16-3.04). Conversely, there was a decrease in types genetically related to HPV-16 among vaccinated (AOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38-0.88) but not unvaccinated women (AOR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.81-2.17). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence of type replacement, but did find evidence of cross-protection against types genetically related to HPV-16. These findings have implications for cost-effectiveness analyses, which may impact vaccine-related policies, and provide information to assess the differential risk for cervical cancer in unvaccinated and vaccinated women, which may influence clinical screening recommendations. The findings also have implications for public health programs, such as health messaging for adolescents, parents, and clinicians about HPV 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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexually Transmitted DiseasesSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207