5. Results. Accuracy and reliability.
Discusses data and results as presented in both tables and texts.
Considers the quality of tables and figures. Assesses the relationship between graphics and text.
Only primary results related to the hypotheses are presented.
Based on a two-page information fact sheet. Data was presented in tables for comparison and interpretation. Titles, legends accurately describe the content. Results RR (95%CI) or M ± SD. RR (95%CI) = relative risk (95% confidence intervals) where RR >1 indicates higher and RR < 1 indicates lower HPV vaccine acceptance. M ± SD = mean ± standard deviation. Intervention: 5.9 ± 3.1, Comparison: 5.7 ± 2.7. No p value was provided. Pre-intervention: 5.8 ± 3.0, Post-intervention:
…show more content…
The actual number was intervention 66, with 48 in the comparison group, female (65% vs. 50%; p < .05).
Table 2 highlights respondent attitudes toward flyer intervention, which confirms the text value and table value correspond in the first heading under variable, positive, negative and missing. Not all the information contained in this table is found in the text. The last heading variable, flyer influenced decision to vaccinate daughter, yes response decision shows 44%. This is not accurate to match the text, which claims a 43% in the results section, and abstract.
Table 3 titled themes raised in qualitative questions – the intervention group only provides responses to two questions posed in the survey. None of the result figures in the table 3 were mentioned in the text results section. Only generalizations were made about how the flyer could be improved and those who were influenced by the flyer in a positive way (n = 38/90; 42%) versus (n = 52/90; 58%). More respondents were not actually influenced by the flyer, which contradicts the authors claim and assertions in the whole article. They actually preferred safety and testing, advice from health care providers, while a significant response fell into nothing 21%, miscellaneous 8% and more information.
Table 4. They found no difference in HPV vaccination intention between the experimental and control conditions. Intervention 5.9 +3.1 control: 5.7 + 2.7, with
The human papillomavirus (HPV) is a sexually transmitted disease (STD) that is very common throughout the United States and worldwide (World Health Organization (WHO), 2016). There are over 100 different forms of the virus with 13 of these types being capable of causing cancer (WHO, 2016). HPV can lead to the development of serious health problems. Theses health problems are especially an issue for adolescent women due to the highly increasing STD rates among this age group (Kostas-Polston, Johnson-Mallard & Berman, 2012). There is a vaccine for many of the common types of HPV, however, many parents are refusing to vaccinate their daughters for various reasons. With the rising cases of STDs, less birth
Though there is evidence that supports that the HPV vaccine is a preventable measure against cervical cancer, there is a poor uptake in the vaccine due to lack of public awareness of the benefits from the HPV vaccine. Every opportunity should be made to incorporate anticipatory guidance to parents and patients in order to help them make informed decisions to receive the HPV vaccine. As an
Instead, if people saw how serious this virus is, then they may be able to more clearly see how beneficial the vaccinations are. HPV is so common and prevalent in today’s society that it will infect 75% – 80% of both males and females throughout their lifetime. Those infected with specific
Single-variable research can answer exciting and important questions like the one in this research, but it does not answer questions about statistical relationships between variables (Jhangiani et al., 2015). Descriptive statistics refers to a set of techniques for summarizing and displaying data (Jhangiani et al., 2015). The study location is within the United States and its territories. The timeline of the study ranges from 2010 – 2015. The logic behind the time is tied to the fact that in 2011, the ACIP endorsed administering the HPV vaccine for adolescent boys with a goal to cover 80% of males aged 13 – 15 years. Therefore, the time frame covers one year before implementation and four years after. There are no anticipated costs associated with this research.
The HPV virus has gone unseen by many until the recent controversy over the vaccine. However, this virus is thought to be one of the world’s most wide spread STD’s. “According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), about 6.2 million women and men are newly infected every year” with HPV. HPV has over 100 strains, with more than thirty that are sexually transmitted. Some of these strains are known to cause cervix, vulva, vagina, anus, or penis cancers and others can cause genital warts. “Studies have found the vaccine to be almost 100% effective in preventing diseases caused by the four HPV types covered by the vaccine—including precancers of the cervix, vulva and vagina, and genital warts” (“HPV Questions and
I have chosen this paper since one of my goals during the Integrated Practicum was to gain knowledge about cancer prevention and management in the community settings. I believe that this article might increase my understanding about the usage of HPV Vaccines in prevention of various types of cancer.
Lack of education, and therefore lack of knowledge, regarding the vaccine and HPV consequences are a major barrier to compliance (Richman, 2016). Lack of knowledge greatly influences all three of the major spheres of the Health Belief Model: perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, and perceived efficacy. “The HBM can be used as a model for health care professionals to help modify behavior…health care providers should specifically focus on emphasizing to their college-aged patients the high risk of acquiring HPV and that the vaccine is effective” (MacArthur, 2017, p. 333). A study by MacArthur examined various aspects of the HBM in relation to HPV vaccine compliance among college students and found that while students believed the vaccine to be efficacious, their perceived threat of the
The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). There are over 100 types of HPV, but only 40 types affect the genital area and can cause genital warts and cervical cancer in women (“Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine”). In 2011 in the United States, 12,109 women were diagnosed with cervical cancer. Of those, 4,092 women died (“Cervical Cancer Statistics”). HPV is not only contracted from sexual intercourse, but also from skin to skin contact, including oral sex. The STI affects males and females involved in both homosexual and heterosexual sexual activities. Over 70 percent of sexually active individuals contract and carry HPV before the age of 80. In order to combat HPV two different brands of HPV vaccination – Gardasil and Cervarix – were created. Both include a vaccination plan of three shots over the course of six months. Gardasil was created by Merck & Co., and was licensed by the FDA in June 2006. The vaccine protects against HPV types 16 and 18, which lead to cervical cancer, as well as types 6 and 11, which cause 90% of genital warts. The FDA later approved Cervarix, created by GlaxoSmithKline, in 2009, which only protects against HPV types 16 and 18 (“Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine”). Originally, Gardasil was only approved for females, but three years after the release, the vaccine was approved
Many believed or thought that by receiving the HPV vaccination, girls and boys are more likely to engage in sexually risky behavior than girls and boys who did not receive the vaccine. One must ask themselves, does this vaccine actually cause promiscuity among those who have received it? A study was conducted in Ontario to test the effect that the HPV vaccine had on sexual behavior among adolescent girls. The study was conducted on girls in 8th Grade who before (2005-2007) and after (2007-2009) the girls received the vaccine. The results of the study concluded that there was no evidence that the HPV vaccine had any effect on sexual behavior of adolescent girls (Smith, L. M., Kaufman, J. S., Strumpf, E. C., & Lévesque, L. E.). These results suggest that concerns over increased promiscuity following HPV vaccination are unwarranted and should not deter from vaccinating at a young
It is estimated that 79 million Americans are infected with the virus with 14 million diagnosed each year. For the collection of subjective data, I will ask if the patient is allergy to any medications or foods. Then, I will verbalize to the family that I need them to step outside the room. During this times, I will ask the patient about being sexually active, use of protection during intercourse, history of sexually transmitted diseases and number of partners. Also, I will ask her about her view of the HPV vaccine. Once the family return to the room, I will verbalize the benefits of the vaccine. For instance, the virus has been connected with cancer of the vulva, vagina, anus, and oropharyngeal. Meanwhile, the detection of these cancers can take several years to be detected as its manifestations on the body takes years to be demonstrated. Consequently, interventions to treat the condition may be too late placing patient’s health status at risk (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016; Cash & Glass,
Clinical Question: Does HPV vaccination in MSM significantly prevent anogenital neoplasia occurrence and recurrence compared to not being vaccinated?
The discussion section reiterates the primary purpose of this article. However, it also overlooks key data in the discussion and results sections. The prime focus is on how successful they have speculated the outcomes of the parental attitudes towards using the HPV information and the HPV vaccine. Again claiming that those in the intervention group who received the additional information reported a statistically significant increase and their perceived benefit repeatedly laid out in survey gaining 43% more likely to accept the HPV vaccine. However, more data is revealed in the descriptive and qualitative feedback section. Consequently, while the purpose is stated, generally did not determine value of the tested
HPV is short for Human Papillomavirus. The virus can cause anal cancer, mouth/throat cancer, vaginal cancer, and cancer in the penis for men. “There are about 17,500 women and 9,300 men affected by HPV-related cancers every year” (Eggen 1). It has been medically proven that the vaccine could have prevented the cancer. The human papillomavirus is passed from one person to another during any skin to skin sexual contact. The virus is most common during late teen years to early twenties. The vaccination is recommended for preteen girls and boys at age eleven or twelve. Some parents feel as though this is preparing their child for sex, and do not find it morally acceptable. However it has been proven that “the HPV vaccine has a better response in preteens, and this could essentially mean better protection for a child” (Eggen 1).Some social conservatives objected at the time that the vaccine would
HPV vaccine delivery has different coverage rate from various areas. Research shows that vaccination rates in developing area is greater than higher income countries, because they can obtain the new resources and extra funding from an external, which can finish the job of vaccine development and maintain greater vaccination (p.324). For example, schools in Vietnam and Uganda, the vaccine recipients is the largest
Among the many arguments for mandatory HPV vaccination, the foremost is that it is an important medical achievement and a major public health milestone. This vaccine has proven to be one-hundred percent effective in preventing the 4 HPV strains that are responsible for seventy percent of cervical cancers and ninety percent of genital warts. In addition, no serious side effects have been identified. Because this vaccine is a preventive measure, administration before onset of sexual activity is ideal; however, even females who have been sexually active can still benefit from this vaccination (Perkins et al., 2010). Nationally and internationally, the HPV vaccine will significantly reduce disease burden by reducing monetary and psychological costs of invasive procedures that remove precancerous and cancerous lesions. By combining vaccination with routine Pap smear screening, these public health efforts have the remarkable opportunity to eradicate cervical cancer (Ramet et al., 2011).