From Google Scholar & other sources: Selected Journal Articles, Newsletters, Dissertations, Theses, Commentary  

From Google Scholar & other sources: Selected Journal Articles, Newsletters, Dissertations, Theses, Commentary
BMJ Open
Volume 8, Issue 3 2018
Impact and acceptability of self-consent procedures for the school-based human papillomavirus vaccine: a mixed-methods study protocol
S Audrey, HB Ferrer, J Ferrie, K Evans, M Bell, J Yates…
The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, administered in early adolescence, can substantially reduce cervical cancer incidence and mortality. However, lack of written parental consent is a key reason why some young women do not receive the vaccine. The national legal framework allows girls to be vaccinated without parental consent provided they are deemed Gillick competent, but there is some reticence about vaccinating without written parental consent. Self-consent procedures are being implemented in Bristol and South Gloucestershire. This study will examine the implementation, acceptability and impact of these new procedures.
Methods and analysis
Statistical analyses of routine data from Public Health England and the Child Health Information System will test if there has been an increase in HPV vaccination uptake in two ways: (a) Is there an increase when comparing before and after the change in our intervention sites? and (b) Does the percentage change in our intervention sites differ from comparison sites (similar to our intervention sites in terms of initial HPV uptake, ethnicity and deprivation levels) in England where no such intervention took place and how? For the process evaluation, we will develop a logic model and use questionnaires, observations and audio-recorded interviews with young women, school nurses, school staff and parents to examine the context, implementation of self-consent and response to the new procedures.
Ethics and dissemination
The University of Bristol Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee and the National Health Service Health Research Authority provided approvals for the study. We will produce a report with recommendations about self-consent procedures in conjunction with key stakeholders. At least two papers will be written for publication in peer-reviewed journals and for conference presentations. A summary of results will be shared with participating immunisation nurses, school staff, young people and parents as requested.
Trial registration number ISRCTN49086105; Pre-results
Systematic Reviews
20187:40  Published: 2 March 2018
Barriers, supports, and effective interventions for uptake of human papillomavirus- and other vaccines within global and Canadian Indigenous peoples: a systematic review protocol
KJ Mrklas, S MacDonald, MA Shea-Budgell…
Despite the existence of human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccines with demonstrated safety and effectiveness and funded HPV vaccination programs, coverage rates are persistently lower and cervical cancer burden higher among Canadian Indigenous peoples. Barriers and supports to HPV vaccination in Indigenous peoples have not been systematically documented, nor have interventions to increase uptake in this population. This protocol aims to appraise the literature in Canadian and global Indigenous peoples, relating to documented barriers and supports to vaccination and interventions to increase acceptability/uptake or reduce hesitancy of vaccination. Although HPV vaccination is the primary focus, we anticipate only a small number of relevant studies to emerge from the search and will, therefore, employ a broad search strategy to capture literature related to both HPV vaccination and vaccination in general in global Indigenous peoples.
Eligible studies will include global Indigenous peoples and discuss barriers or supports and/or interventions to improve uptake or to reduce hesitancy, for the HPV vaccine and/or other vaccines. Primary outcomes are documented barriers or supports or interventions. All study designs meeting inclusion criteria will be considered, without restricting by language, location, or data type. We will use an a priori search strategy, comprised of key words and controlled vocabulary terms, developed in consultation with an academic librarian, and reviewed by a second academic librarian using the PRESS checklist. We will search several electronic databases from date of inception, without restrictions. A pre-defined group of global Indigenous websites will be reviewed for relevant gray literature. Bibliographic searches will be conducted for all included studies to identify relevant reviews. Data analysis will include an inductive, qualitative, thematic synthesis and a quantitative analysis of measured barriers and supports, as well as a descriptive synthesis and quantitative summary of measures for interventions.
To our knowledge, this study will contribute the first systematic review of documented barriers, supports, and interventions for vaccination in general and for HPV vaccination. The results of this study are expected to inform future research, policies, programs, and community-driven initiatives to enhance acceptability and uptake of HPV vaccination among Indigenous peoples.
Systematic review registration
PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42017048844

Academic Pediatrics
March 2018 Volume 18, Issue 2, Supplement, Pages S14–S16
Advancing human papillomavirus vaccine delivery: 12 priority research gaps
PL Reiter, MA Gerend, MB Gilkey, RB Perkins…
Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been available in the United States for a decade, yet vaccination coverage remains modest. A recent review identified numerous interventions for increasing HPV vaccination,1 but effects were small and evidence was often insufficient to identify best practices. The National HPV Vaccination Roundtable sponsored a 1-day national meeting in 2016 on best and promising practices in HPV vaccine delivery, in part to identify important research gaps.
Meeting attendees were HPV vaccine delivery experts including scientists, clinicians, and other stakeholders. Approximately 100 people attended in-person and approximately 400 additional people streamed the meeting online ( Throughout the meeting, the meeting facilitators encouraged attendees to identify gaps that future research should address and write them on display boards (or send via e-mail or Twitter). Facilitators did not provide attendees with a predefined list of gaps. Attendees identified a total of 33 gaps (Table). In-person attendees voted for up to 5 gaps they believed were top priorities. We categorized the gaps into themes. The 12 gaps that received the most votes generally fit into these themes: 1) social media and vaccine confidence, 2) health care provider interventions, or 3) system-level approaches. Two gaps in the top 12 that did not fit these themes were determining what interventions work in rural areas (gap 7) and the impact of survivor testimonials (gap 9)…