MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892387509 · doi:10.1200/jgo.18.27600

Evaluating Clinical and Cost Impacts of Achieving 90% HPV Vaccination Rate Against Cervical Cancer in Canada Using the OncoSim Cancer Simulation Model

2018· article· en· W2892387509 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of TorontoStatistics CanadaCanadian Partnership Against Cancer
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical cancerVaccinationHerd immunityCohortHPV infectionVaccine efficacyDemographyPsychological interventionCancerRegimenOncologyGynecologyInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cervical cancer can be largely prevented through vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV). In Canada, HPV vaccination of school-aged girls started in 2008 and has reached an average rate of 67% across the country. However, this rate is below a current national target of 90%. Aim: We project the difference in lifetime clinical outcomes and health system costs of achieving a 90% HPV vaccination rate versus a 67% rate for girls vaccinated in 2015 using the OncoSim-Cervical model. Methods: The OncoSim-Cervical model (version 2.5) is a microsimulation model led by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, with model development by Statistics Canada, to evaluate the impacts of cervical cancer interventions in Canada. It has two parts, the first, the HPV Microsimulation Model, simulates the transmission of HPV between males and females including possible modulation by vaccination and herd immunity, and provides projections of HPV infection and prevalence for input to the cervical cancer natural history component in the second part. We simulated two cohorts of 5-10 year old girls in 2015; one receiving HPV vaccination at the rate of 67% and another at 90%. Their relative lifetime cervical cancer outcomes and costs were compared. Assumptions included: 100% efficacy of the HPV vaccine; triennial cytology screening between ages 21 and 65; 90% screening recruitment of age-eligible women with 80% rescreening; and a $500 cost for a 3-dose quadrivalent HPV vaccine regimen. Projected costs were undiscounted and are in 2016 CAD. Results: Compared with the 67%-vaccinated cohort, in the 90%-vaccinated cohort there was a lifetime reduction of 23% in cervical cancer incident cases and 21% in cervical cancer deaths. Lifetime cancer treatment costs decreased by $26 million (23%), and wart treatment costs and precervical cancer costs decreased by $3.2 million (15%) and $45 million (16%) respectively. Lifetime screening costs decreased by $47 million (2%). Conclusion: Achieving a nationally-set target of 90% HPV vaccination in Canadian girls would not only save more lives but would free up funds that could be redirected to other health system needs. Planners could aim for relatively high nation-wide rates of HPV vaccination coverage to enhance their cervical cancer control strategy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.368 · 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