Awareness of human papillomavirus and its vaccine among patients attending primary care clinics at King Saud University Medical City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: We aimed to assess the awareness, attitudes, and practice regarding human papillomavirus (HPV) and its vaccine among women attending primary care clinics in Riyadh. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 326 women aged 18–60 years who attended primary care clinics between June 2014 and June 2015. The participants completed a validated, self-administered questionnaire. Data collected included sociodemographic information (e.g., age, marital status, education, and employment), knowledge of HPV and its vaccine, and attitudes regarding HPV vaccine acceptance. Results: Among the respondents, 59.4% were married, and 43.6% had received a university education. The study population had a marked lack of information regarding HPV infection and vaccination. Only 32.8% of the women knew that HPV is transmitted sexually, while 21% knew that it could cause cervical cancer. A quarter of the participants were aware of the protective vaccine against HPV. There were no statistically significant differences in participants' knowledge levels, according to age, marital status, educational level, and occupational status. The doctors, the media, and the friends were the primary sources of information to 5.6%, 7.7%, and 24.5% of the participants, respectively. Conclusion: Overall awareness of HPV and its vaccine and cervical cancer screening is low among Saudi women. There is a need for formulating preventive strategies and effective awareness programs for better HPV-related education, vaccine availability, and the importance of cervical cancer screening.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".