MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4292939532 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062556

Study protocol for assessing knowledge, attitudes and belief towards HPV vaccination of parents with children aged 9–14 years in rural communities of North West Cameroon: a qualitative study

2022· article· en· W4292939532 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laurie Elit, Calvin Ngalla, Glen Mbah Afugchwi, Eric Tum, Joël Fokom-Domgue, Élysée Nouvet

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster University
FundersMerck
KeywordsMedicineThematic analysisFamily medicineQualitative researchPopulationInstitutional review boardMedical educationEnvironmental healthSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Despite human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine being incorporated in the National Immunisation Programme in Cameroon in 2019, HPV vaccine uptake among eligible girls has been poor (5%). The barriers to HPV vaccination in this high-burden setting have not been previously studied, especially in rural areas. We propose to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of parents of girls aged 9–14 years regarding HPV vaccine. Methods and analysis Study design : a qualitative descriptive study will be conducted using one-on-one semi-structured interviews with parents of girls aged 9–14 years from 3 health districts in Cameroon (Mbingo, Njinikom and Fundong) who can converse in English or Pidgin English. Enrolment will occur until thematic saturation—approximately 40 participants. Analysis : quantitative methods will be used to describe the interviewees. All interviews will be audio recorded, transcribed and loaded into a tool to facilitate analysis (ATLAS.ti). Transcripts will be coded and thematic analysis will be conducted. Analysis will occur concurrent with interviews. Ethics and dissemination Ethics : institutional review board approval will be obtained from the Cameroon Baptist Convention Health Board (CBCHB), Cameroon and McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. Dissemination : study findings will be presented via a report and webinar to the Ministry of Health, the funders, the CBCHB and in person to healthcare providers and interested members of the general population in the study region. Plans are to share findings internationally through peer-reviewed publication(s) and presentation(s). Trial registration number NCT05325138 .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.189
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→