Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28626810›Full record

ArticlePapillomavirus research (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2017

Human papillomavirus (HPV) in young women in Britain: Population-based evidence of the effectiveness of the bivalent immunisation programme and burden of quadrivalent and 9-valent vaccine types.

Clare Tanton, David Mesher, Simon Beddows, Kate Soldan, Soazig Clifton, Kavita Panwar, Nigel Field, Catherine H Mercer, Anne M Johnson, Pam Sonnenberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Papillomavirus research (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Clare TantonResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, London WC1E 6JB, UK. Electronic address: c.tanton@ucl.ac.uk.
David MesherCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control (CIDSC), Public Health England, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, UK. Electronic address: david.mesher@phe.gov.uk.
Simon BeddowsVirus Reference Department, Public Health England, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, UK. Electronic address: simon.beddows@phe.gov.uk.
Kate SoldanCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control (CIDSC), Public Health England, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, UK. Electronic address: kate.soldan@phe.gov.uk.
Soazig CliftonResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, London WC1E 6JB, UK; NatCen Social Research, 35 Northampton Square, London EC1V 0AX, UK. Electronic address: s.clifton@ucl.ac.uk.
Kavita PanwarVirus Reference Department, Public Health England, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, UK. Electronic address: kavita.panwar@phe.gov.uk.
Nigel FieldResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, London WC1E 6JB, UK. Electronic address: nigel.field@ucl.ac.uk.
Catherine H MercerResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, London WC1E 6JB, UK. Electronic address: c.mercer@ucl.ac.uk.
Anne M JohnsonResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, London WC1E 6JB, UK. Electronic address: anne.johnson@ucl.ac.uk.
Pam SonnenbergResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, London WC1E 6JB, UK. Electronic address: p.sonnenberg@ucl.ac.uk.
Public Health England · GBMortimer Market Centre · GBUniversity College London · GBNatCen Social Research · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0701757
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2008, the UK introduced an HPV immunisation programme in girls. Population-based prevalence estimates of bivalent (HPV-16/18), quadrivalent (HPV-6/11/16/18) and 9-valent (HPV-6/11/16/18/31/33/45/52/58) vaccine types, and comparison over time, are needed to monitor impact, evaluate effectiveness and guide decision-making on vaccination strategies.

methodsThe third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3) in 2010-12, tested urine for HPV from 2569 sexually-experienced women aged 16-44. We report type-specific HPV prevalence and compare results with 1798 women in Natsal-2 (1999-2001) using age-adjusted prevalence ratios (APR).

findingsIn Natsal-3, 4.2% of women aged 16-44y were positive for HPV-16/18 and 2.9% for HPV-6/11. In 16-20 year olds, 4.5%, 10.8% and 20.7% had at least one bivalent, quadrivalent or 9-valent vaccine type, respectively. Three-dose vaccine coverage was 52.0% in women aged 18-20y. In this age group, HPV-16/18 prevalence was lower in Natsal-3 than Natsal-2 (5.8% vs 11.2%; APR=0.48[95%CI: 0.24-0.93]), however, prevalences of HPV-6/11, HPV-31/33/45 and HPV-52/58 were unchanged. HPV-16/18 prevalence was also unchanged in women aged 21-44y (APR=0.85[0.61-1.19]).

interpretationThese probability surveys provide evidence of the impact of the bivalent immunisation programme. Reductions were specific to HPV-16/18 and to the age group eligible for vaccination. However, substantial vaccine-preventable HPV remains.

Indexed as

HPVHPV vaccineImmunisation programmePrevalenceProbability sample surveyWomen

Identifiers

PMID28626810
PMCPMC5462921
OpenAlexW2569638620

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.