ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2022
"
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors that influence caregivers' and adolescents' views and practices regarding human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for adolescents: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Young adult perspectives on deciding to get human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in urban and rural communities: A qualitative research study.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Prevention and control of HPV and HPV-related cancers in France: the evolving landscape and the way forward - a meeting report.BMC proceedings · 2023Article
- Histologıcal results of HPV genotyping from a colposcopy center.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Article
- Review
- Perception and Coverage of Conventional Vaccination among University Students from Rouen (Normandy), France in 2021.Vaccines · 2022Article
- What do adolescents think about vaccines? Systematic review of qualitative studies.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is one of the most publicly mistrusted vaccines in Europe, with countries such as France struggling with low vaccine uptake due to parental questioning of vaccine risks and benefits. However, limited evidence exists on adolescent girls' perceptions of the risks and benefits of HPV vaccination. The aim of this qualitative study was to provide an in-depth exploration and comparison of French mothers (n = 21) and adolescent girls' (n = 36) perceptions of the risks and benefits of HPV vaccination. A thematic analysis showed that adolescent girls and mothers perceived the risks and benefits of HPV vaccination differently, with girls reporting positive and beneficial views and emotions toward vaccination and mothers expressing concerns about possible risks. Adolescent girls also reported that both perceptions and actual risks and benefits may vary from one individual to another. Vaccine safety was also understood differently, with mothers reporting a widespread view that vaccines are unsafe and focusing on controversial side effects and girls discussing short-term consequences of vaccination (e.g. pain, fever) and administration and storage issues. Strategies to improve uptake of HPV vaccination should consider and address both the mothers' and daughters' perceptions and understandings of HPV vaccination.
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.