ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2025
A Qualitative Study of Attitudes Toward HPV Vaccine Recommendation in Otolaryngology Clinics.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: The incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal cancers has increased such that they are now the most prevalent HPV-related cancer. In 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expanded the indication for Gardasil-9 to include the prevention of oropharyngeal and other head and neck cancers caused by selected HPV types, but uptake remains low. Otolaryngology office interactions may provide opportunities to increase uptake, given the relevance of HPV to clinical practice. This study explored the feasibility of recommending HPV vaccination in otolaryngology clinics. Methods: Participants were recruited between February to June of 2022 from the alumni of the residency and fellowship training programs at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics. Participant interviews comprised open-ended questions pertaining to otolaryngologists' attitudes toward HPV vaccination recommendation. Interview recordings were transcribed, coded, and analyzed for themes. Results: Participants were willing to respond if patients asked about the HPV vaccine, although a common attitude toward vaccine discussions was that they were a pediatrician's responsibility. One barrier to recommending HPV vaccination was providers' concern that discussing the vaccine when not directly relevant to the patient's chief complaint could result in patient frustration. Nevertheless, participants endorsed the feasibility of discussing the vaccine during follow-up visits after the patient's needs had been addressed or via the distribution of educational materials to patients. Conclusion: Otolaryngologists do not currently identify recommending HPV vaccine uptake as their clinical responsibility. While such recommendations may not be feasible in every patient encounter, there could be a role for this in the appropriate clinical scenario. These findings can be used to inform interventions aimed at recommending the vaccine in otolaryngology clinics.
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.