ArticleVaccine2017
Physicians' current use and preferences for male HPV vaccine-related patient education materials.
Article in Vaccine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tdap-HPV vaccination bundling in the USA: Trends, predictors, and implications for vaccine series completion.Preventive medicine · 2022Article
- A National Survey of Obstetrician/Gynecologists' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs Regarding Adult Human Papillomavirus Vaccination.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding physician preferences for educational materials to support male HPV vaccination is critical to improving vaccine uptake. Pediatric (Peds) and Family Medicine (FM) physicians in Florida completed a survey from May-August 2014 assessing current use of male-specific HPV vaccination patient education materials, and preferences for materials to increase HPV vaccination uptake. Peds and FM responses were compared with chi-squared or nonparametric tests. Most participants were FM (53.2%), White (66.6%), non-Hispanic (74.1%), and provided male patients/parents with HPV educational materials (59.1%). More than half (55.5%) provided a CDC factsheet for parents. Peds were more likely to indicate they provide educational materials (p<0.0001) than FM. The preferred source was the CDC (77.8%). Peds preferred using a factsheet as the medium of information more often than FM (85.6% vs. 68.0%; p<0.0001). When asked about preferences for targeted materials, 74.8% of providers indicated they would prefer materials targeted towards patients, 63.2% preferred information targeted towards parents, and 20.7% indicated they prefer non-targeted materials. Future research should focus on the development and testing of new HPV vaccine-specific materials and communication strategies for Peds and FM physicians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.