Summary of the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) Statement: Updated guidance on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Without vaccination, approximately 75% of people in Canada will acquire a human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in their lifetime. HPV vaccine coverage rates continue to fall short of the national goal of 90% coverage for two or more doses by 17 years of age. Recent evidence and World Health Organization (WHO) guidance now support a 1- or 2-dose schedule for younger age groups, which can simplify vaccination efforts and improve coverage rates compared to a multi-dose immunization program. Methods: The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) reviewed available evidence on the clinical benefits and risks of a 1-dose HPV vaccine schedule, as well as additional factors, including ethics, equity, feasibility and acceptability. The evidence and programmatic considerations were organized using a process informed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework and all of the information was used to facilitate NACI guidance development. Results: A 1-dose schedule is highly effective against HPV infection based on available evidence in younger female populations, with current follow-up of up to 11 years following vaccination. Infectious disease modelling shows that a 1-dose strategy in males and females in Canada is expected to have similar health outcomes over the short and long term compared to two doses. Conclusion: NACI updated recommendations for individuals 9 to 20 years of age to receive one dose of 9vHPV (Gardasil-9, Merck) vaccine. For individuals 21 years of age and older, a 2-dose schedule should be administered. Individuals considered immunocompromised and individuals infected with HIV should receive a 3-dose series. NACI also issued a discretionary recommendation for HPV vaccination for individuals 27 years and older, and updated guidance to allow HPV vaccine during pregnancy.
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 | 0.034 | 0.091 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.015 |
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".