Evolution of Public Health Human Papillomavirus Immunization Programs in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Since 2007, all Canadian provinces and territories have had a publicly funded program for vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. The objective of this study was to describe the evolution of these vaccination programs. Methods: This was a targeted literature review of public HPV vaccination programs and vaccination coverage rates, based on information provided by jurisdictional public health authorities. Results: HPV vaccination of schoolgirls began in school years 2007/08 to 2010/11 with three doses of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine in all provinces except Quebec, which started with two doses. By 2018/19, all jurisdictions were vaccinating with two doses of the nonavalent vaccine in both girls and boys, except Quebec, which used a mixed vaccination schedule with one dose of the nonavalent and one dose of the bivalent vaccines. Public HPV vaccination programs in most provinces include after-school catch-up vaccination. Immunocompromised or other high-risk individuals are eligible for the HPV public vaccination program in most provinces, but policies vary by jurisdiction. In 2017/18, vaccination coverage rates in provincial HPV school-based programs varied from 62% in Ontario to 86% in Prince Edward Island in girls and from 58% in Ontario to 86% in Prince Edward Island in boys. Conclusions: Since their introduction, Canadian school-based HPV public vaccination programs have evolved from a three-dose to a two-dose schedule, from a quadrivalent to a nonavalent vaccine, and from a girls-only to a gender-neutral policy. Vaccination coverage rates have varied markedly and only Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland/Labrador have maintained rates exceeding 80%.
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 | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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".