MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402658324 · doi:10.1186/s41256-024-00380-z

Accelerating HPV vaccination in Africa for health equity

2024· article· en· W4402658324 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Asempah, Ene Ikpebe

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Health Research and Policy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaccinationMedicineCervical cancerPublic healthImmunizationDiseaseEnvironmental healthDisease burdenImmunologyCancerPopulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cervical cancer is a preventable disease that continues to burden socioeconomically underserved regions, especially in Africa. Vaccination of adolescents who have never had sex with prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines proves effective in preventing the disease. However, vaccine accessibility and availability are two persistent challenges in low-resource settings. For this commentary, a trend analysis is conducted for national HPV vaccination and coverage rates in Africa, a region with high burden of the disease. This is in consideration of the World Health Organization (WHO) strategy to vaccinate 90% of adolescent girls by the age of 15, as part of strategy to eliminate cervical cancer by 2030. The analysis estimated that the rate of incorporating HPV vaccination in national immunization programs in Africa occurs slowly, at a mean wait time of 12 years with estimated coverage rate of 52%. A policy change that harnesses strategic approaches, such as a regionalized vaccination program, is recommended to hasten HPV vaccination for the rest of African countries without a national program.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.418
GPT teacher head0.640
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Health Research and PolicySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207