↓ Skip to main content

Social mobilisation, consent and acceptability: a review of human papillomavirus vaccination procedures in low and middle-income countries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
219 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Social mobilisation, consent and acceptability: a review of human papillomavirus vaccination procedures in low and middle-income countries
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3517-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Severin Kabakama, Katherine E. Gallagher, Natasha Howard, Sandra Mounier-Jack, Helen E. D. Burchett, Ulla K. Griffiths, Marta Feletto, D. Scott LaMontagne, Deborah Watson-Jones

Abstract

Social mobilisation during new vaccine introductions encourages acceptance, uptake and adherence to multi-dose schedules. Effective communication is considered especially important for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, which targets girls of an often-novel age group. This study synthesised experiences and lessons learnt around social mobilisation, consent, and acceptability during 55 HPV vaccine demonstration projects and 8 national programmes in 37 low and middle-income countries (LMICs) between January 2007 and January 2015. A qualitative study design included: (i) a systematic review, in which 1,301 abstracts from five databases were screened and 41 publications included; (ii) soliciting 124 unpublished documents from governments and partner institutions; and (iii) conducting 27 key informant interviews. Data were extracted and analysed thematically. Additionally, first-dose coverage rates were categorised as above 90 %, 90-70 %, and below 70 %, and cross-tabulated with mobilisation timing, message content, materials and methods of delivery, and consent procedures. All but one delivery experience achieved over 70 % first-dose coverage; 60 % achieved over 90 %. Key informants emphasized the benefits of starting social mobilisation early and actively addressing rumours as they emerged. Interactive communication with parents appeared to achieve higher first-dose coverage than non-interactive messaging. Written parental consent (i.e., opt-in), though frequently used, resulted in lower reported coverage than implied consent (i.e., opt-out). Protection against cervical cancer was the primary reason for vaccine acceptability, whereas fear of adverse effects, exposure to rumours, lack of project/programme awareness, and schoolgirl absenteeism were major reasons for non-vaccination. Despite some challenges in obtaining parental consent and addressing rumours, experiences indicated effective social mobilisation and high HPV vaccine acceptability in LMICs. Social mobilisation, consent, and acceptability lessons were consistent across world regions and HPV vaccination projects/programmes. These can be used to guide HPV vaccination communication strategies without additional formative research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 218 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 57 26%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Researcher 15 7%
Student > Postgraduate 14 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 6%
Other 32 15%
Unknown 66 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 15%
Social Sciences 22 10%
Psychology 14 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 3%
Other 22 10%
Unknown 73 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 October 2022.
All research outputs
#3,388,914
of 23,507,888 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,849
of 15,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,538
of 345,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#116
of 406 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,507,888 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 345,585 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 406 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.