Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27235782›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)2016

Taking stock and looking ahead: Behavioural science lessons for implementing the nonavalent human papillomavirus vaccine.

Alice S Forster, Jo Waller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

2 authors.

Alice S ForsterHealth Behaviour Research Centre, UCL, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. Electronic address: alice.forster@ucl.ac.uk.
Jo WallerHealth Behaviour Research Centre, UCL, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 17219Cancer Research UK 17429Cancer Research UK C49896/A17429Cancer Research UK C7392/A17219
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development and licensing of a nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality from HPV-related cancers beyond that of first generation HPV vaccines. However, this benefit can only be realised if the offer of vaccination is accepted. Uptake of first generation HPV vaccines is not complete and shows huge global variation. In addition to practical and financial challenges to optimising coverage, behavioural issues explain a large proportion of the variance in vaccine receipt. This commentary draws on the findings of over a decade of behavioural science research seeking to understand uptake of first generation HPV vaccines, in order to anticipate challenges to implement the nonavalent HPV vaccine. Challenges include distrust of combination vaccines, uncertainty about long-term efficacy, distrust of a new and (perceived to be) untested vaccine, cost and uncertainty regarding interchanging doses of first generation and nonavalent vaccines and the appropriateness of revaccination. We use behavioural science theory and existing evaluations of interventions to increase uptake of vaccines to identify evidence-based approaches that can be implemented by vaccine stakeholders to address parents' concerns and maximise uptake of the nonavalent HPV vaccine.

Indexed as

Behavioral SciencesMass VaccinationPatient Acceptance of Health CareHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansNeoplasmsPapillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesPapillomavirus VaccinesBehavioural scienceDecision makingPapillomavirus vaccinesPatient acceptance of health carePsychological intervention

Identifiers

PMID27235782
PMCPMC4920641

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.