Impact of one and two human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine doses on community-level HPV prevalence in South African adolescent girls: study protocol and rationale for a pragmatic before–after design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Vaccines against human papillomavirus (HPV) are the key to controlling cervical cancer in low/middle-income countries (LMICs) where incidence is highest, but there have been limited data from these settings on programme impact on HPV prevalence, and none in a population with endemic HIV infection. Furthermore, for many LMICs, the currently recommended two-dose schedule is difficult to deliver at scale, so there is mounting interest in a single-dose schedule. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: ffectiveness Study is a hybrid impact evaluation of the national South African HPV vaccination programme, which has targeted grade 4 girls aged at least 9 years in public schools with two doses of vaccine since 2014, and a single-dose vaccine 'catch-up' programme delivered in one district in 2019. Impacts of both schedules on the prevalence of type-specific HPV infection will be measured using repeat cross-sectional surveys in adolescent girls and young women aged 17-18 years recruited at primary healthcare clinics in the four provinces. A baseline survey in 2019 measured HPV prevalence in the cohort who were ineligible for vaccination because they were already above the target age or grade under either the national programme or the single-dose programme in the selected district. HPV prevalence surveys are repeated in 2021 in the selected district, and in 2023 in all four provinces. We will calculate prevalence ratios to compare the prevalence of HPV types 16 and 18 in the single-dose (2021) and two-dose (2023) cohorts, with the vaccine-ineligible (2019) cohort. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The project was approved by the University of the Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC #181005), and the University of New South Wales HREC (#181-005). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, scientific meetings, reports and community forums.
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 | 0.071 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.008 |
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".