HPV vaccination in Africa in the COVID-19 era: a cross-sectional survey of healthcare providers’ knowledge, training, and recommendation practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Although the burden of cervical cancer in Africa is highest, HPV vaccination coverage remains alarmingly low in this region. Providers' knowledge and recommendation are key drivers of HPV vaccination uptake. Yet, evidence about providers' knowledge and recommendation practices about the HPV vaccine against a backdrop of emerging vaccine hesitancy fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic is lacking in Africa. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2021-2022 among healthcare providers involved in cervical cancer prevention activities in Africa. They were invited to report prior training, the availability of the HPV vaccine in their practice, whether they recommended the HPV vaccine, and, if not, the reasons for not recommending it. Their knowledge about the HPV vaccine was assessed through self-reporting (perceived knowledge) and with three pre-tested knowledge questions (measured knowledge). Results: Of the 153 providers from 23 African countries who responded to the survey (mean age: 38.5 years, SD: 10.1), 75 (54.0%) were female and 97 (63.4%) were based In countries with national HPV immunization programs. Overall, 57 (43.8%) reported having received prior training on HPV vaccine education/counseling, and 40 (37.4%) indicated that the HPV vaccine was available at the facility where they work. Most respondents (109, 83.2%) reported recommending the HPV vaccine in their practice. Vaccine unavailability (57.1%), lack of effective communication tools and informational material (28.6%), and need for adequate training (28.6%) were the most commonly reported reasons for not recommending the HPV vaccine. While 63 providers (52.9%) reported that their knowledge about HPV vaccination was adequate for their practice, only 9.9% responded correctly to the 3 knowledge questions. Conclusion: To increase HPV vaccination coverage and counter misinformation about this vaccine in Africa, adequate training of providers and culturally appropriate educational materials are needed to improve their knowledge of the HPV vaccine and to facilitate effective communication with their patients and the community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".