ArticleVaccines2026
Correlates of Integrated Human Papillomavirus Vaccination and Cervical Cancer Screening Protection in U.S. Low-Income Women.
Article in Vaccines, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesIn the United States, adult human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage remains low at 20-50%, depending on age, and cervical cancer (CC) screening rates range from 68 to 76%. Few studies have evaluated characteristics of women who are both HPV vaccinated and up to date (UTD) with screening as an integrated outcome. The purpose of the present study was to classify women into four prevention categories and examine factors associated with being double protected compared to unprotected.
methodsData were gathered via an online survey from a sample of low-income women (household income < USD 50,000) provided by a research survey company (n = 719). Women were classified into four categories: vaccinated only, screened only, both vaccinated and screened (double protected), or neither (unprotected). Sociodemographic characteristics, healthcare access, and Health Belief Model constructs were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression compared women who were double protected with those unprotected (n = 274).
resultsMost women were UTD with screening only (57.8%), while 15.5% were double protected and 22.6% were unprotected. Younger age (Odds Ratio [OR = 0.93; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.89, 0.98), having ≥1 medical visit in the past year (OR = 4.16; 95% CI: 1.74, 9.95), higher perceived CC risk (OR = 3.65; 95% CI: 1.41, 9.43), greater perceived benefits of CC screening (OR = 1.96; 95% CI: 1.45, 2.66), and higher HPV knowledge (OR = 1.09; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.17) were associated with higher odds of being double protected.
conclusionsA substantial proportion of low-income women lack comprehensive CC prevention. Integrated, bundled prevention strategies that simultaneously promote HPV vaccination and screening may be important to reduce CC disparities.
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.