Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23115621›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2012

Reasons for receiving or not receiving HPV vaccination in primary schoolgirls in Tanzania: a case control study.

Deborah Watson-Jones, Keith Tomlin, Pieter Remes, Kathy Baisley, Riziki Ponsiano, Selephina Soteli, Silvia de Sanjosé, John Changalucha, Saidi Kapiga, Richard J Hayes

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IVRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Deborah Watson-JonesLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom. Deborah.Watson-Jones@lshtm.ac.uk
Keith Tomlin
Pieter Remes
Kathy Baisley
Riziki Ponsiano
Selephina Soteli
Silvia de Sanjosé
John Changalucha
Saidi Kapiga
Richard J Hayes
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBNational Institute for Medical Research · TZMwanza Intervention Trials Unit · TZInstitut d'Investigació Biomédica de Bellvitge · ES

Funding

Medical Research Council G0700837Medical Research Council G0901756Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 090318MA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are few data on factors influencing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination uptake in sub-Saharan Africa. We examined the characteristics of receivers and non-receivers of HPV vaccination in Tanzania and identified reasons for not receiving the vaccine.

methodsWe conducted a case control study of HPV vaccine receivers and non-receivers within a phase IV cluster-randomised trial of HPV vaccination in 134 primary schools in Tanzania. Girls who failed to receive vaccine (pupil cases) and their parents/guardians (adult cases) and girls who received dose 1 (pupil controls) of the quadrivalent vaccine (Gardasil™) and their parents/guardians (adult controls) were enrolled from 39 schools in a 1∶1 ratio and interviewed about cervical cancer, HPV vaccine knowledge and reasons why they might have received or not received the vaccine. Conditional logistic regression was used to determine factors independently associated with not receiving HPV vaccine.

resultsWe interviewed 159 pupil/adult cases and 245 pupil/adult controls. Adult-factors independently associated with a daughter being a case were older age, owning fewer household items, not attending a school meeting about HPV vaccine, and not knowing anyone with cancer. Pupil-factors for being a case included having a non-positive opinion about the school de-worming programme, poor knowledge about the location of the cervix, and not knowing that a vaccine could prevent cervical cancer. Reasons for actively refusing vaccination included concerns about side effects and infertility. Most adult and pupil cases reported that they would accept the HPV vaccine if it were offered again (97% and 93% respectively).

conclusionsSensitisation messages, especially targeted at older and poorer parents, knowledge retention and parent meetings are critical for vaccine acceptance in Tanzania. Vaccine side effects and fertility concerns should be addressed prior to a national vaccination program. Parents and pupils who initially decline vaccination should be given an opportunity to reconsider their decision.

Indexed as

Patient Acceptance of Health CareAdultAlphapapillomavirusCase-Control StudiesChildFemaleHuman Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine Quadrivalent, Types 6, 11, 16, 18HumansMalePapillomavirus VaccinesParentsTanzaniaHuman Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine Quadrivalent, Types 6, 11, 16, 18Papillomavirus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID23115621
PMCPMC3480345
OpenAlexW2116138339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.