MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416070380 · doi:10.1186/s12939-025-02669-y

Revisiting HPV vaccination post-COVID: geopolitical, sociocultural, and ethical disparities in global health

2025· review· en· W4416070380 on OpenAlexaff
Sondos Al Sad, Labiqah Iftikhar, Masa Chamout

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Equity in Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of California, San Francisco
KeywordsGlobal healthCervical cancerPublic healthPsychological interventionVaccinationPandemicHealth careHealth equityHPV vaccinesHealth services research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: HPV vaccines have been revolutionary in preventing HPV-related cervical cancer and reshaping the cervical cancer screening guidelines in the past decades. Yet, challenges persist in achieving universal accessibility and utilization. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, shifts have emerged in HPV vaccine research, implementation strategies, and the determinants shaping uptake and delivery, particularly from a global equity perspective. METHODS: This is a scoping review examining English-language, peer-reviewed articles published following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic until the end of 2024. It focuses on the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine and factors influencing its uptake. Articles were retrieved from PubMed and Embase databases and screened for relevance using predefined search terms. RESULTS: Out of 2755 articles, 349 were included. We identified that most peer-reviewed articles focus on interventions and implementation strategies more than acknowledging geopolitical affairs, gender specificity, religious and ethical dimensions, medical mistrust, or healthcare discrimination. Most of the articles were cross-sectional in nature and most were funded by the National Cancer Institute. Interestingly, we found no peer-reviewed articles on the intersectionality of Judaism and HPV vaccine uptake, with a limited number on Islamic, Christian, or other religious intersectionality. Articles addressing how low- and middle-income countries could be equipped to develop and manage their own vaccine programs and manufacturing were largely absent; instead, cost-effectiveness research focused primarily on the vaccine’s ability to reduce disease burden. CONCLUSION: Post-pandemic research on HPV vaccination indicates that levels of hesitancy and uptake have remained relatively stable. However, the literature highlights persistent inconsistencies in how the vaccine is prioritized across communities, healthcare professionals, and health systems. Messaging regarding its importance for cancer prevention remains fragmented, while cost barriers and the absence of the vaccine from many national immunization schedules continue to limit access. Notably, ethical, religious, and cultural considerations receive limited attention in current research, despite the pandemic underscoring the global significance of these factors in shaping health behaviors. These findings suggest a need to re-examine how HPV vaccination is framed and advanced as a public health priority within diverse sociocultural and systemic contexts.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.012
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.169
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.439 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Equity in HealthSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207