Prevalence of Oral Human Papillomavirus Infection Among Urban Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men in Canada, 2017–2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral human papillomavirus (HPV) infections are a leading cause of oropharyngeal cancers. In 2015 and 2016, HPV vaccines became publicly funded for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) under 27 years of age in most Canadian provinces. METHODS: Between 2017 and 2019, sexually active GBM in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver were recruited through respondent-driven sampling. Participants aged 16-30 years were invited to self-collect oral rinse specimens for HPV testing. We estimated HPV prevalence in the oral tract overall and compared these by vaccination status. RESULTS: Among the 838 GBM with a valid oral specimen, 36.9% reported receiving ≥1 dose of HPV vaccine. Overall, oral HPV prevalence was 2.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5%-3.7%) for at least 1 HPV type and 1.2% (95% CI, .5%-1.9%) for any high-risk type. We detected quadrivalent (HPV 6/11/16/18) vaccine-preventable types in 0.3% (95% CI, .0%-1.0%) of vaccinated individuals and 1.1% (95% CI, .1%-2.0%) of unvaccinated individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Oral HPV prevalence was low in a population of young urban GBM in Canada, of whom 37% were vaccinated. Findings serve as a benchmark for monitoring of vaccination impacts on oral HPV infection within this priority population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".