Challenges and opportunities of school-based HPV vaccination in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary prevention of human papillomavirus (HPV) through vaccination is a high priority in Canada's cancer prevention efforts. All Canadian provinces and territories have introduced publicly funded, school-based vaccination programs against HPV, but vaccine uptake remains suboptimal in some jurisdictions. We conducted a descriptive qualitative study to better understand the determinants of low HPV vaccine uptake and identify strategies to enhance vaccine acceptance using the socio-ecological model. In Quebec, interviews and focus groups were held in 2015-2016 with 70 key informants including immunization managers, school nurses, school principals, teachers and parents of Grade 4 students (9 years of age). Our findings showed that HPV vaccine uptake was dependent on many interrelated factors at the individual and interpersonal level (e.g. knowledge and attitudes of the different players involved in the vaccination system), at the community level (e.g. social group values and norms, media coverage around the HPV vaccine), at the organizational level (e.g. allocated resources, information provision, consent process, immunization setting and environment) and at the policy level (e.g. changes in provincial HPV vaccine program). We are using the data collection and interpretation tools and approaches developed by our team and used in Quebec to expand our study to four other provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Nova Scotia). We are conducting environmental scans, semi-structured interviews and a survey to better understand the determinants of low HPV vaccine uptake and identify strategies to enhance vaccine acceptance. Having an in-depth understanding of the determinants of HPV vaccination in school settings is critical in order to identify root causes of the suboptimal vaccine uptake and to develop tailored interventions to address these on both supply- and demand-side issues.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".