The association between having a household member with a cancer-related limitation and human papillomavirus vaccine uptake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between having a household member with a cancer-related limitation (physical, mental, or emotional) and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake among females aged 9 – 17 years. METHODS: We analyzed 2008 National Health Interview Survey for our cross-sectional analysis. All households with females aged 9 – 17 years were eligible for inclusion in our analysis. Our outcomes of interest included HPV vaccine initiation (≥1 dose) and series completion (full 3 doses). A dichotomous variable indicating a cancer-related limitation for a household member was created if at least one adult in the household responded to having a limitation caused by cancer. We used Firth’s bias-reducing penalized likelihood for logistic regression[11] to estimate prevalence odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% profile penalized likelihood confidence intervals (CIs) for HPV vaccine uptake among young females who had a household member with a cancer-related limitation compared to young females who did not have a household member with a cancer-related limitation after adjusting for child’s age, race/ethnicity, and SES. RESULTS: HPV vaccine initiation and completion were higher among females aged 9-17 years who had a household member with a cancer-related limitation (Initiation: OR=1.42, 95%CI: 0.26, 5.18); Completion: OR=2.50, 95%CI: 0.26, 11.58). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that females aged 9 – 17 years in the United States who have a household member with a cancer-related limitation (physical, mental, or emotional) may be more likely to initiate and complete the HPV vaccination. However, our point estimates lack precision (evident by wide confidence intervals) because of limited prevalence of the exposure in our study population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".