Oral sex and oral cancer in the context of human papillomavirus infection: lay public understanding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a risk factor for ano-genital and cervical cancers and has been associated with head and neck malignancies in the context of oral sex for the transmission of the virus. However, the level of knowledge that lay people have in terms of HPV transmission through oral sex and oral cancer development remains unknown. A pilot sample of 150 questionnaires was distributed at specific non-profit health organizations in Vancouver, Canada. Questions included perceived risks for oral sex in terms of HPV infection and oral cancer development, and the frequency with which respondents were asked about oral sexual practices by physicians and dentists. Data were analysed statistically by age group (19– 30, 31–50, 50\), gender (male, female), and sexual orientation (queer, straight). 110 questionnaires were returned fully completed. For the transmission of HPV, 58% of the participants believed that oral sex is an activity of no or low risk, whereas 72% considered the same activity to be of no risk for the development of oral cancer. There was no statistical difference between gender and sexual orientation. Participants never discussed related health risks in regard to oral sex with their physicians or dentists. In conclusion, although recent attention has been given to the potential links between HPV infection and oral cancer, such links remain mostly unknown by the public. Physicians and dentists could discuss oral sex practices to raise awareness with their patients. This is a small sample size study and the results should be interpreted with caution.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".