https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0955-3392
ABSTRACT
Background: To assess the knowledge and attitudes of middle school students toward vaccination, we measured their understanding of vaccine safety and effectiveness, expectations for communication with heath care providers, and their desired role in the vaccination decision-making process.
Methods: A cross-sectional, self-administered survey was conducted among seventh and eighth grade students in a middle school in Upstate New York. Bivariate analyses were conducted to identify differences in perspective by gender, grade, and attitudes toward vaccination.
Results: Of 346 students attending class, 336 (97.1%) participated. The majority of respondents were White (71.3%) and 11 to 13 years of age (78.2%). Boys were significantly more likely than girls to perceive vaccines to be very safe (48.4% vs 30.2%, p < 0.01) and very effective (49.7% vs 29.0%, p < 0.01). Approximately one-third of adolescents reported having a say in the decision to be vaccinated and a quarter of students expressed a desire for specific information about vaccines.
Conclusions: This study found that young adolescents in a nonurban area of Upstate New York were generally marginalized in the vaccine decision-making process yet third of them indicated an interest in how vaccines work and a desire to participate in healthcare decisions. Interventions to improve vaccine uptake among adolescents should capitalize on this desire to understand vaccine safety, effectiveness and mechanism of action.
Introduction
In the last decade, the adolescent immunization schedule has been modified to confer protection against multiple infections and HPV-related cancers.Citation1 The current platform now includes four vaccines: tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap), meningococcal (MCV), human papillomavirus (HPV), and influenza.Citation2,Citation3 Although vaccination coverage rates are high for vaccines mandated for school entry (i.e., TdaP, MCV) they remain below the national goals of 70% and 80% for influenza and HPV, respectively.Citation4 Research has illuminated parental attitudes and the utility of provider-oriented interventions, and multiple factors contributing to relatively stagnant coverage rates have been identified, including concerns about safety, efficacy and timing of vaccines.Citation5-Citation10 Relatively little is known about the adolescent’s perspective on vaccines, but it appears that some adolescents have an impact on the decision-making process and vaccine acceptance, highlighting the importance of understanding teen perspective.Citation11-Citation14
The HPV vaccine is one of the most effective measures to protect adolescents against a variety of HPV-related cancersCitation15-Citation18, but uptake remains low. In 2017, only 44.3% of males and 53.1% of females completed the 3-dose series.Citation19 Vaccine hesitancy research initially focused on identifying specific concerns among parents and providers.Citation20-Citation22 The parents who refuse vaccines noted that their stance was, in part, due to a paucity of information being delivered by the clinicianCitation23, coupled with underlying concerns about vaccine safetyCitation24, efficacyCitation25, impact on adolescent sexual behavior, and little personal knowledge about the vaccine.Citation26,Citation27 Recent research evaluating the communication style between provider and parent is beginning to elucidate some dynamics which may promote vaccine acceptance, such as assertively engaging hesitant parents to address their concerns, adopting a more presumptive approach, and ensuring that the adolescent has a voice in the conversation triad which is often dominated by the adults in the exam roomCitation28-Citation30.
With respect to the adolescent perspective, the majority of studies have focused on females and their mothers, finding that these young women are somewhat passive, and while they tend to mirror their mother’s positionCitation25,Citation27,Citation31 they desire more information on the topic.Citation23,Citation25 The perspective of the adolescent male is less understood, and given the lower vaccination rates among boys, it is an important line of inquiry.Citation32 One consideration is the relative impact of physician recommendation among parents of boys versus girls. The provider’s recommendation appears to be more influential in the vaccine decision among parents of adolescent males compared to females, but providers recommend the vaccine less frequently for adolescent males,Citation33 perhaps a residual effect of the relatively more recent recommendation to include boys in the universal 11–12 year vaccination schedule.Citation34 In other words, parents of females may have had several more years of exposure to physician recommendation and media coverage of the HPV vaccine, and thus may have already established a firm opinion less amenable to physician counsel, whereas parents of young adolescent males may be hearing the recommendation for the first time.
Qualitative studies have provided valuable insight into the decision-making process.Citation11,Citation14 Providers have stated that older adolescents sometimes have a role in decision-making, noting the occasional parental capitulation to an adolescent’s vaccine refusal.Citation11 Given that older teens appear to exert some influence in the decision-making processCitation11,Citation14, it is curious that little is known about the desired role and perspectives of younger adolescents, the ages during which vaccine administration is most efficacious.Citation13 The present study evaluates the perceptions of middle school students regarding vaccines as well as their perceived experience of the medical encounter.
Results
A total of 346 students were in attendance in the science classes participating in the study. Of these, one student was excluded from taking the survey (parent opted out), and eight students wrote “do not use” on their questionnaires or stated they did not want to participate; an additional one student provided insufficient information to be included. Thus, 336 students who completed the survey (response proportion of 97.1%) were included in the analyses.
The vast majority of adolescents were 12 (35.2%) and 13 (42.7%) years of age; 180 (53.6%) were female and 156 (46.4%) were males. The majority of students were White (71.3%). ()
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of 336 participating 7th and 8th grade students.
Overall, most adolescents (88.7%) believe they received all vaccines recommended by their health care provider, though this was more common among boys than girls (93.0% versus 85.5%, p = 0.03). While decision-makers varied, about one third of adolescents (33.0% of girls and 37.4% of boys) reported having a say in the decision to be vaccinated. Girls were more likely than boys to report that their mothers had the greatest influence in vaccine decision making (48.5% vs 31.7%, p = 0.01). Physicians appeared to be slightly, but not statistically significantly, more influential with boys in the vaccine decision compared to girls (41.3% versus 35.5%, p = 0.29). About a third of all adolescents reported discussing vaccines with their parents outside the medical encounter and another third reported not discussing vaccines at all. () About one-third of adolescents (30.2% of girls and 34.2% of boys) reported making decisions about vaccines with their parents. () Among 105 adolescents who wanted to make vaccine decisions, 43 (41.4%) reported being part of the decision; of the 222 adolescents that didn’t care or didn’t want to make a decision, 62 (28%) reported being part of the decision (p = 0.02).
Table 2. Participants’ perspective on vaccines and experience with medical encounter, stratified by gender.
Boys were significantly more likely than girls to perceive vaccines to work very well (49.7% vs 29.0%, p < 0.01) and be very safe (48.4% vs 30.2%, p < 0.01). Consistent with this finding, girls were slightly, but not significantly, more concerned about vaccines than boys (16.5% vs 10.9%, p = 0.14) and girls wanted more information about vaccines from doctors compared to boys (31.6% vs 23.1%, p = 0.08). () In terms of adolescent’s experience with their provider, nearly half (46.9%) of adolescents felt the doctor shared control of the encounter and a majority (87.7%) had an equal exchange of information with them. () However, about a quarter of adolescents felt their parent was in charge of the medical encounter. () One respondent’s comment highlighted this dynamic by noting “I want to know what the vaccine is. I am never told; the doctor only spoke to my mom then gives it [the vaccine] to me.” Only 8th graders were asked specifically about HPV vaccination. The results were consistent with the findings in the general vaccine survey of all students. ()
Table 3. 8th graders’ attitudes and knowledge about HPV vaccine, stratified by gender.
Among all 336 students, 257 (76.5%) responded to open-ended questions and provided insight into adolescents’ knowledge and perceptions of vaccines. () The adolescents expressed the need to learn basic information about vaccines, including their contents and how they work. While some adolescents showed concern regarding vaccine-related experiences (e.g., “they hurt”), adolescents also expressed concerns that vaccines could seriously harm and potentially kill them (e.g. “What if they affect someone differently and kill them?”). Some adolescents were also unsure about whether vaccines are effective (e.g. “Some people have different bodies so the vaccine might not work for them.”).
Table 4. Summary of 7th and 8th grade students’ qualitative responses categorized by themes elicited.
Discussion
In this survey of predominantly 12- and 13-year-old adolescents in an Upstate New York school, we found that about third of adolescents wanted to be a part of the vaccine-decision making process and desired more vaccine information. We also noted that vaccine hesitancy emerges early, complementing research that has found similar sentiments among young adults.Citation35 With the expansion of the adolescent vaccination platform to include Tdap, meningococcal, HPV and influenza vaccines, our findings have implications regarding the importance of engaging adolescents in the vaccine decision-making process. Early adolescence is an important stage during which health behavior patterns develop.Citation36 As such, this formative period represents a key opportunity to engage young adults in a dialogue about immunology while their attitudes and beliefs are amenable to clinician’s recommendation, and before those who become parents themselves must consider the decision on behalf of their own children.
Similar to our findings, a qualitative study of 20 adolescents, 11–18 years of age residing in an urban area, indicated that pain and vaccine safety were their primary concerns, and many teens played a passive role in vaccine decision-making.Citation13 Our findings are also consistent with a prior study of 32 adolescents from Michigan, where adolescents had a greater role in vaccine decision making than previously identified.Citation11 Our findings refine the appreciation of gender-specific disparities in the vaccine decision, and how these are modified by the parent-child dyad. Specifically, female adolescents in our study had more concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy than their male peers, and they were more likely to report that their mothers had the greatest influence in the vaccine decision. Our findings are consistent with McRee, et al., who reported that half of the parents stated their daughters played a role in the decision to receive HPV vaccineCitation12, however, the authors noted the study was not designed to describe the role the adolescents played nor the nature of their participation. Our results begin to span this gap by highlighting concerns adolescents have about HPV vaccine and the gender-specific perceived role in decision-making, and we open a line of inquiry which should be expanded to include adolescents of various ages, ethnic and socio-demographic backgrounds. In addition, interventions to inform adolescents about the value of vaccines should continue to be developed and evaluated.
As the HPV vaccine recommendation is more recent for males than females, there may be greater awareness of this vaccine among both the female adolescent and her parents than among male adolescents.Citation34 It is possible that gender-based differences in communications about HPV vaccination may have influenced parents of female adolescents more than parents of male adolescents, particularly outside the medical encounter. It will be important to better understand parental willingness to engage adolescents in vaccine decision-making.
Responses to the open-ended questions indicated a pattern of answers that mirror common misconceptions about vaccines, including perceptions that a single vaccine formulation may not work properly in all individuals, and that vaccines, specifically the HPV vaccine, can potentially cause severe adverse reactions or death. Our study took place in a community where media and local news channels propagated misinformation that Gardasil is unsafe and caused death in a young teen who died of unknown cause shortly after Gardasil vaccination in 2007.Citation27 These sorts of media stories are not uncommon. Given the importance of social media in shaping opinion on a wide variety of contemporary topics, it is important that future research efforts identify the sources of information most trusted by adolescents. It may be that the same avenues which influence adult vaccine hesitancy are also influential among adolescents.
The misconceptions and concerns of the students about vaccines suggest that such information should be incorporated into the school curriculum from a young age. In the short term, one way to address many of these identified issues is through better education regarding vaccines and the immune system, including pertinent specifics such as the association between younger age (< 15 years of age) and better immunogenicity of the HPV vaccine.Citation31 However, in the recent National Science Education Standards monograph of the National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment of the National Research Council, there was no mention of vaccines, vaccination, or immunization, and the only reference to the immune system was in a discussion of complex body systems.Citation37 Efforts need to be made to incorporate education on vaccines in the curricula of younger children, through both health education and science classes.
This article is, to the best of our knowledge, one of the largest attempts thus far to gather quantitative data on preteen and young teen perceptions and attitudes towards vaccination outside urban centers. As with any survey, our study is subject to several limitations. First, internal validity could not be assessed but should be high given the excellent response proportion. Our findings are based on self-reported data and reliability was not assessed as prior research has shown high adolescent reliability in self-reported surveys for low-frequency/high-risk behaviors, especially when students understood the importance of the survey.Citation23 While not generalizable to the state or country, the students live in a small town, middle-America school which is rarely included in HPV vaccine research usually conducted in major urban centers. Future studies should explore vaccine attitudes among adolescents and their desire to be involved in the vaccine decision-making process with national sampling to allow for improved external validity.
Methods
Study participants and procedures
The study was conducted in the single middle school of a small city in Upstate New York (population approximately 22,000) in March 2016. The city is predominately White (>80%) and economically struggling. The median income of this population was about $41,000, substantially below the national median of about $57,617.Citation39 Over 20% of residents lived in poverty, and less than a quarter of the population over 25 years had a bachelor’s degree.Citation40 Over half the students received free or reduced cost meals.
All students in the seventh and eighth grades attending a science class were invited to participate in the study. The procedures utilized were modeled on the procedures created for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), including using a parental consent-based opt-out procedure.Citation41 A week before the survey was administered, a letter was sent to parents informing them about the survey and providing instructions for how to refuse permission for their child to participate. The study was described to the classes by a researcher, including the content of the survey and that participation was voluntary. Student assent was obtained at the time of the survey administration. The study was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) of the State University of New York, Upstate Medical University and secondary data analysis of the de-identified data exempted from further review by the IRB at the University at Albany.
The 15-minute self-administered survey was designed to protect the student’s privacy. Students did not record their name or any other identifiers. Students were told they could skip any question they felt uncomfortable answering. Further, students were instructed to write “Do Not Use” anywhere on the survey if they did not want to participate in the study and did not want to state that refusal. The surveys were collected in unmarked, sealed envelopes. The sealed envelopes were opened by the researchers and reviewed for the notation “Do Not Use;” if this notation was found the survey was excluded from the study. A stress ball with the school logo was given to each student as a thank you, regardless of participation in the survey.
Survey content
Survey items were obtained or adapted from existing surveys including the YRBS,Citation41 and the Young Adult Health Care Survey (YAHCS).Citation42 These surveys were augmented with questions regarding vaccine decision-making. The questionnaire included four sections: (1) socio-demographic characteristics, (2) perspectives on vaccines, (3) HPV vaccine-related questions (only for eighth graders), and (4) health care utilization and experiences in medical encounters.
Socio-demographic questions, including age, grade, gender, race and ethnicity were obtained from the YRBS. Questions on vaccine experiences and perspectives oriented on vaccination history: for example, involvement in the decision-making process, and whether the student thought vaccines to be effective and safe. Similar questions were asked of eighth graders specifically about HPV vaccination. The questions related to HPV vaccination were limited to the eighth grade survey at the request of school administration. HPV vaccination was referred to by the trade name Gardasil because in preliminary discussions students did not recognize the term “HPV vaccine” but did know if they had received the “Gardasil vaccine.”
Health care utilization queries included identification of their primary health care provider (type of practice, gender). Encounter questions included presence of others in the visit (e.g., seen alone, parent always present), the desire to be seen without parent in the room, and the sense that he/she was listened to and had a voice in discussions.
Data was entered into EpiInfo version 7, and exported to Microsoft Excel and SAS for data analyses. Descriptive statistics were computed for each factor. Bivariate analyses were conducted to identify gender-specific differences in perspective. Chi-square tests were computed and two-tailed p-values are presented, with <0.05 considered statistically significant. Responses to open-ended questions regarding perceived harm and a need for more education about vaccines were reviewed by two independent coders to identify themes. The themes were reviewed and a list of codes was generated to reconcile levels of detail coded. Then, coders reviewed the data again and coded the data using the code list developed. Examples of the themes are presented in the results.
Conclusion
Our research indicates that nearly third of adolescents want more information to improve their knowledge and awareness about the safety and benefits of vaccines, including the HPV vaccine, and want to be a part of the vaccine decision-making process.
Future initiatives should develop appropriately tailored interventions to address the adolescent’s self-identified desire to be better informed, and to support parents and clinicians in strategies to promote collaborative decision-making.
Abbreviations
| HPV | = | Human papillomavirus |
| CDC | = | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |
| YRBS | = | Youth Risk Behavior Survey |
| YAHCS | = | Young Adult Health Care Survey |
Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest
No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.
Financial disclosures
Dr. Shaw served as consultant for Pfizer, Inc. Dr. Salmon has received grant funding or consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Walgreens. All other authors have no conflicts to disclose.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the participating providers, school administration, health education teachers and students for their support and willingness to participate in this project. We sought no funding for this project.
References
- National Foundation for Infectious Diseases. Call to action: addressing new and ongoing adolescent vaccination challenges; 2016 [accessed 2018 Jan 23]. http://www.nfid.org/homepage/additional-offerings/call-to-action-adolescent-vaccination-challenges.pdf.
- CDC. Notice to readers: recommended childhood immunization schedule – United States; 2000 [accessed 2018 Mar 1]. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4902a4.htm.
- Recommended immunization schedule for children and adolescents aged 18 years or younger, United States; 2018 [accessed 2018 Mar 1]. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/child/0-18yrs-child-combined-schedule.pdf.
- Healthy people 2020 national immunization goals; 2015 [accessed 2018 Mar 1]. https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/Pubs/348-458-HealthyPeople2020Immunization Goals.pdf.
- Reiter PL, Stubbs B, Panozzo CA, Whitesell D, Brewer NT. HPV and HPV vaccine education intervention: effects on parents, healthcare staff, and school staff. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2011;20(11):2354–61. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.
- Tan TQ, Gerbie MV. Perception, awareness, and acceptance of human papillomavirus disease and vaccine among parents of boys aged 9 to 18 years. Clin Pediatr. 2016;56(8):737–43. doi:10.1177/0009922816682788.
- Brewer NT, Hall ME, Malo TL, Gilkey MB, Quinn B, Lathren C. Announcements versus conversations to improve HPV vaccination coverage: a randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2017;139(1):e20161764. doi:10.1542/peds.2016-1764.
- VanWormer JJ, Bendixsen CG, Vickers ER, Stokley S, McNeil MM, Gee J, Belongia EA, McLean HQ. Association between parent attitudes and receipt of human papillomavirus vaccine in adolescents. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):766. doi:10.1186/s12889-017-4787-5.
- Shapiro GK, Tatar O, Amsel R, Prue G, Zimet GD, Knauper B, Rosberger Z. Using an integrated conceptual framework to investigate parents’ HPV vaccine decision for their daughters and sons. Prev Med. 2018;116:203–10. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.09.017.
- Dube E, Gagnon D, MacDonald N, Bocquier A, Peretti-Watel P, Verger P. Underlying factors impacting vaccine hesitancy in high income countries: A review of qualitative studies. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2018;17(11):989–1004. doi:10.1080/14760584.2018.1541406.
- Gowda C, Schaffer SE, Dombkowski KJ, Dempsey AF. Understanding attitudes toward adolescent vaccination and the decision-making dynamic among adolescents, parents and providers. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:509. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-509.
- McRee AL, Reiter PL, Brewer NT. Vaccinating adolescent girls against human papillomavirus-who decides? Prev Med. 2010;50(4):213–14. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.02.001.
- Hughes CC, Jones AL, Feemster KA, Fiks AG. HPV vaccine decision making in pediatric primary care: a semi-structured interview study. BMC Pediatr. 2011;11(1):74. doi:10.1186/1471-2431-11-74.
- Chang J, Ipp LS, de Roche AM, Catallozzi M, Breitkopf CR, Rosenthal SL. Adolescent-parent dyad descriptions of the decision to start the HPV vaccine series. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2018;31(1):28–32. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2017.10.003.
- Huh WK, Joura EA, Giuliano AR, Iversen O-E, de Andrade RP, Ault KA, Bartholomew D, Cestero RM, Fedrizzi EN, Hirschberg AL, et al. Final efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety analyses of a nine-valent human papillomavirus vaccine in women aged 16-26 years: a randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet. 2017;390(10108):2143–59. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31821-4.
- Kavanagh K, Pollock KG, Cuschieri K, Palmer T, Cameron RL, Watt C, Bhatia R, Moore C, Cubie H, Cruickshank M, et al. Changes in the prevalence of human papillomavirus following a national bivalent human papillomavirus vaccination programme in Scotland: a 7-year cross-sectional study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(12):1293–302. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30468-1.
- Luostarinen T, Apter D, Dillner J, Eriksson T, Harjula K, Natunen K, Paavonen J, Pukkala E, Lehtinen M. Vaccination protects against invasive HPV-associated cancers. Int J Cancer. 2018;142(10):2186–87. doi:10.1002/ijc.31231.
- Kjaer SK, Nygard M, Dillner J, Brooke Marshall J, Radley D, Li M, Munk C, Hansen BT, Sigurdardottir LG, Hortlund M, et al. A 12-year follow-up on the long-term effectiveness of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in 4 nordic countries. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66(3):339–45. doi:10.1093/cid/cix797.
- Walker TY, Elam-Evans LD, Yankey D, Markowitz LE, Williams CL, Mbaeyi SA, Fredua B, Stokley S. National, regional, state, and selected local area vaccination coverage among adolescents aged 13-17 years - United States, 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(33):909–17. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6733a1.
- Siddiqui M, Salmon DA, Omer SB. Epidemiology of vaccine hesitancy in the United States. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013;9(12):2643–48. doi:10.4161/hv.27243.
- Allison MA, Hurley LP, Markowitz L, Crane LA, Brtnikova M, Beaty BL, Snow M, Cory J, Stokley S, Roark J, et al. Primary care physicians’ perspectives about HPV vaccine. Pediatrics. 2016;137(2):e20152488. doi:10.1542/peds.2015-2488.
- Patel PR, Berenson AB. Sources of HPV vaccine hesitancy in parents. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013;9(12):2649–53. doi:10.4161/hv.26224.
- Stokley S, Jeyarajah J, Yankey D, Cano M, Gee J, Roark J, Curtis RC, Markowitz L. Human papillomavirus vaccination coverage among adolescents, 2007-2013, and postlicensure vaccine safety monitoring, 2006-2014–United States. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014;63:620–24.
- Brelsford D, Knutzen E, Neher JO, Safranek S. Clinical Inquiries: which interventions are effective in managing parental vaccine refusal? J Fam Pract. 2017;66:E12–e14.
- Mullins TL, Griffioen AM, Glynn S, Zimet GD, Rosenthal SL, Fortenberry JD, Kahn JA. Human papillomavirus vaccine communication: perspectives of 11-12 year-old girls, mothers, and clinicians. Vaccine. 2013;31(42):4894–901. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.07.033.
- Dempsey AF, Abraham LM, Dalton V, Ruffin M. Understanding the reasons why mothers do or do not have their adolescent daughters vaccinated against human papillomavirus. Ann Epidemiol. 2009;19(8):531–38. doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2009.03.011.
- Sopracordevole F, Cigolot F, Mancioli F, Agarossi A, Boselli F, Ciavattini A. Knowledge of HPV infection and vaccination among vaccinated and unvaccinated teen-aged girls. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2013;122(1):48–51. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.02.011.
- Sturm L, Donahue K, Kasting M, Kulkarni A, Brewer NT, Zimet GD. Pediatrician-parent conversations about human papillomavirus vaccination: an analysis of audio recordings. J Adolesc Health. 2017 Aug;61(2):246–51. Epub 2017 Apr 25. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.02.006.
- Shay LA, Baldwin AS, Betts AC, Marks EG, Higashi RT, Street RL Jr, Persaud D, Tiro JA. Parent-provider communication of HPV vaccine hesitancy. Pediatrics. 2018 Jun;141(6):pii: e20172312. Epub 2018 May 15. doi:10.1542/peds.2017-2312.
- Gilkey MB, Moss JL, Coyne-Beasley T, Hall ME, Shah PD, Brewer NT. Physician communication about adolescent vaccination: how is human papillomavirus vaccine different? Prev Med. 2015 Aug;77:181–85. Epub 2015 Jun 4. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.05.024.
- Ferrer HB, Trotter C, Hickman M, Audrey S. Barriers and facilitators to HPV vaccination of young women in high-income countries: a qualitative systematic review and evidence synthesis. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:700. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-700.
- Lacombe-Duncan A, Newman PA, Baiden P. Human papillomavirus vaccine acceptability and decision-making among adolescent boys and parents: A meta-ethnography of qualitative studies. Vaccine. 2018;36(19):2545–58. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.02.079.
- Mohammed KA, Geneus CJ, Osazuwa-Peters N, Adjei Boakye E, Tobo BB, Burroughs TE. Disparities in provider recommendation of human papillomavirus vaccination for U.S. Adolescents. J Adolesc Health. 2016;59(5):592–98. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.06.005.
- Recommendations on the use of quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in males—advisory committee on immunization practices (ACIP). MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60(50):1705–08. doi:10.1186/1471-2431-11-74.
- Bednarczyk RA, Chu SL, Sickler H, Shaw J, Nadeau JA, McNutt LA. Low uptake of influenza vaccine among university students: evaluating predictors beyond cost and safety concerns. Vaccine. 2015;33(14):1659–63. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.02.033.
- Federal Centre for Health Education, BZgA. WHO regional office for Europe and BZgA standards for sexual education in Europe: a framework for policy makers, educational and health authorities, and specialists. Colonge. 2010 [accessed 2018 Nov 9]. https://www.oif.ac.at/fileadmin/OEIF/andere_Publikationen/WHO_BZgA_Standards.pdf.
- Laidsaar-Powell KJM, Mather T, Juraskova I. Vaccination decision-making and HPV knowledge: how informed and engaged are young adult HPV vaccine recipients in Australia? 2014:ID 495347, 9. doi:10.1155/2014/495347.
- Guzman GG Household income, 2016: American community survey brief. US Census Bureau; 2017 [ accessed 2018 Nov 6]. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2017/acs/acsbr16-02.pdf.
- United States Census Bureau. American community survey, 2016 American community survey 5-year estimates, table [blinded]; generated by LA McNutt; using American FactFinder; [accessed 2018 Nov 5]. http://factfinder2.census.gov.
- CDC. 2013 handbook for conducting youth risk behavior surveys. Atlanta (GA): US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC; 2012 [accessed 2018 Nov 9]. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/overview.htm.
- Brener ND, Kann L, Shanklin S, Shanklin S, Kinchen S, Eaton DK, Hawkins J, Flint KH. Methodology of the youth risk behavior surveillance system–2013. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2013;62:1–20.
- Bethell C, Klein J, Peck C. Assessing health system provision of adolescent preventive services: the young adult health care survey. Med Care. 2001;39:478–90.