Feasibility of interventions to increase HPV vaccination acceptability and coverage in school-based programs: Findings from a pilot study in Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines have been offered in Quebec schools to 4th-grade (9–10 years old) girls since 2008 and boys since 2016. HPV vaccine coverage does not reach the 90 % target in many regions. This project evaluated the feasibility and the acceptability of interventions to improve HPV vaccine acceptability and coverage in school-based programs. The evaluation was conducted in 32 Quebec schools in 2019–2020. We tested a strategy of three interventions implemented in sequence (face-to-face information session, email reminder with an online decision support tool, and telephone reminder using motivational interviewing (MI) techniques). Parents and school staff completed online surveys. School nurses participated in individual interviews. Key stakeholders participated in a workshop to identify enabling conditions and barriers to implementing interventions across Quebec. The strategy was generally well-received by school staff, nurses, and parents. Many parents found the 3 interventions helpful to support their vaccination decision. Most parents (92 %) suggested that the face-to-face information session and the decision support tool (82 %) be offered to all parents. Nevertheless, delivering classroom presentations was perceived by nurses as logistically challenging. Parents were generally satisfied with the telephone reminder, but only a limited number of nurses applied motivational interviewing techniques, as half (51 %) of unreturned consent forms were due to forgetfulness. Our strategy was accepted and deemed feasible by a majority of parents, school staff, and nurses. Collaboration between health authorities and schools is essential for implementing interventions to enhance vaccine acceptance in school-based programs. • A strategy to enhance vaccine acceptance in schools was developed and evaluated. • Three interventions were included (in-person presentation, email reminder, phone call) • The strategy was well-received by school staff, nurses and parents. • Many parents found it useful in helping them decide about vaccination. • Accessing different vaccine promotion interventions facilitated nurses' work. • Collaboration between health authorities and schools is key for implementation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".