| Title |
Effects of a Narrative HPV Vaccination Intervention Aimed at Reaching College Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Prevention Science, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11121-011-0254-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suellen Hopfer |
| Abstract |
This longitudinal study reports on the development and evaluation of a narrative intervention aimed at increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination among college women. The prevention of HPV is a public health priority due to its pervasiveness and relationship to cervical cancer, the second leading cause of cancer deaths among women worldwide. Pilot work utilizing culture-centric narrative theory guided development of the intervention content. Exemplification theory led to hypotheses comparing communication sources of the narrative messages (peer only, medical expert only, or a combination of the two source types) in a four-arm randomized controlled trial (N = 404; 18-26 year olds). The combined peer-expert narrative intervention nearly doubled vaccination compared to controls (22% vs. 12%). The pragmatic goal of increasing HPV vaccination and the theoretical predictions about message source were supported. As predicted, the inclusion of peer and medical expert sources plays a critical role in promoting HPV vaccination among college women. Furthermore, the intervention increased HPV vaccination by increasing vaccine self-efficacy and intent. Theoretical and practical implications for designing effective HPV vaccine messages are discussed. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 229 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 224 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 38 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 36 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 36 | 16% |
| Unknown | 57 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 34 | 15% |
| Psychology | 30 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 29 | 13% |
| Unknown | 71 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 March 2023.
All research outputs
#3,061,348
of 23,515,785 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#211
of 1,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,261
of 137,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,515,785 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 137,470 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.