HPV Vaccine and College-Age Men: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human papillomavirus (HPV) potentially affects every sexually active man in the United States and Canada. In 2017, the vaccine became publicly funded in Canada for males ages 9–26, and was integrated into school vaccination programs. In 2019, HPV vaccination was recommended as routine for all U.S.-based males and females ages 9 through 26, and a shared decision for adults >26 years; however, since the approval of the vaccine in 2006 for females only, the age and dosing recommendations for males have followed a complicated and changing trajectory. Current adherence rates are low among college and university age males (18–26 years); therefore, understanding and addressing the barriers and facilitators for men’s HPV vaccination is critically important. The purpose of the current scoping review is to provide a synthesis of recent literature pertaining to HPV in college and university age men, as a means to guiding health-care providers (HCPs). Drawing from 15 published articles, three thematic findings were inductively derived. Theme one, lack of awareness, was underpinned by men’s knowledge deficits about their eligibility for, and the availability of HPV vaccines. Theme two, underestimating and embodying risk, included men’s engagement in sexual activities while misinformed or denying the risk for contracting HPV. The third theme, strategies for increasing men’s awareness, summarizes messaging strategies used to lobby young men to vaccinate. The review findings indicate gender-sensitive interventions targeting college-age men, including early, frequent, and consistent messaging on HPV are key.
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 | 0.005 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".