Features of human papillomavirus vaccination education strategies in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe studies on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination education strategies from low- and middle-income countries in the published literature that could be applicable in Sub-Sahara Africa. STUDY DESIGN: This scoping review was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework advanced by Levac et al. METHODS: We searched four electronic health sciences databases for relevant reports published between January 2006 and January 2021. Two reviewers screened for inclusion and extracted data for analysis and synthesis. Descriptive statistics and narrative descriptions were used to summarize the findings. RESULTS: The database search retrieved 1757 reports, of which 48 were from low- and middle-income countries and met the inclusion criteria. Of these, there were 39 interventional studies (81.3%). Less than one-fifth of the studies (n = 9) reported a theoretical basis for their strategies. Most strategies sought to improve knowledge and awareness about HPV (75%, n = 36), whereas outcomes for the remaining studies were related to increasing HPV vaccine acceptability. HPV education strategies (1) primarily targeted females, (2) were mostly provided by health professionals, and (3) used various modalities of learning, including in-person sessions, text-based materials, media, theater, and online delivery. CONCLUSIONS: HPV educational strategies are underresearched in most LMICs, suggesting the need for more primary observational, interventional, and experimental research, as well as program evaluations, focused on HPV educational strategies and theoretically informed. Once additional studies are added to the body of evidence, it will be valuable to review and synthesize diverse sources of evidence to determine what educational strategies are most useful and have the greatest impact on HPV vaccination in these settings, particularly Sub-Saharan Africa.
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 | 0.023 | 0.094 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.029 | 0.028 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".