GYNAECOLOGY GYNAECOLOGY The Acceptability of HPV Vaccination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Women attending the University of Saskatchewan Student Health Services are being offered human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination but are not filling their prescriptions. We sought to identify gaps in knowledge of the link between HPV infection, cervical dysplasia, and cervical cancer among women attending the Student Health Services, and to identify barriers to HPV vaccination among this cohort of women. Methods: Women attending the University of Saskatchewan Student Health Services for any reason were invited to complete an 18-question survey. The survey included questions regarding knowledge of the purpose of Pap smears, the role of HPV infection in cervical dysplasia and cancer, and HPV vaccination. The questions were designed to elicit both quantitative and qualitative data. Data analysis included basic descriptive analysis and summarization of qualitative data. Results: Four hundred surveys were distributed, and 371 (91%) were returned. Eighty-two percent of participants were aware of the HPV vaccine, and 40 % ranked their knowledge of HPV as good or very good; however, only 6 % correctly answered questions about methods of preventing HPV infection. Participants identified cost (62%), concerns over adverse effects (43%), and lack of knowledge (36%) as barriers to undergoing vaccination. Comments about the HPV vaccine reflected frustration with cost and concerns about adverse effects. When participants were asked if they would undergo vaccination if it were free, 60 % responded “yes, ” 31% responded “maybe, ” and 8 % responded “no.” Conclusion: The young women in our survey had significant gaps in knowledge of HPV infection and prevention, and educational programs must be structured to address these deficits. Institutions promoting vaccination must deal with the barriers of cost and fear of adverse effects.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | high |
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 | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.004 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".