MO School-delivered HPV Immunization indigenous communities: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous communities globally grapple with a high burden of human papillomavirus-related diseases like cancer of the cervix. Despite the availability of a highly protective vaccine for HPV, it is evident that immunization levels with this vaccine is still low among these communities. Compounded with socioeconomic marginalization and a history of colonial, racist, and underfunded health services, Indigenous communities in several countries continue to experience poor health outcomes due to HPV infections. HPV is administered to school-aged children in grades 6-10 depending on province or territory. Since HPV infections are delivered predominantly via schools, a study on how colonial history including residential schools; health services and health seeking behaviour may give a pointer as to the factors that affect school-based HPV immunizations. A scoping review was conducted on published literature in the US, Canada, and Australia to decipher how school-based HPV immunization was conducted and to delineate the causes of low HPV vaccine uptake. Results: Schools located in remote areas with a high proportion of Indigenous students, high absenteeism rate and in lower socioeconomic brackets had the lowest uptake of HPV vaccine. As compared to their non-Indigenous peers, Indigenous students had a lower initiation as well as lower completion rates for HPV vaccine. Countries that captured the Indigenous status of individuals at vaccination points had better quality data of the immunization status of Indigenous communities. For the US and Canada, immunization data on Indigenous communities is lacking.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".