Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Human papillomavirus vaccination and social inequality: results from a prospective cohort study

  • S. A. ROBERTS (a1), L. BRABIN (a2), R. STRETCH (a2), D. BAXTER (a3), P. ELTON (a4), H. KITCHENER (a2) and R. McCANN (a5)...

Summary

We investigated the effect of social inequalities on the uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, combining data from a feasibility study conducted in 2007–2008 in 2817 secondary schoolgirls in two UK primary-care trusts, with census and child health records. Uptake was significantly lower in more deprived areas (P<0·001) and in ethnic minority girls (P=0·013). The relatively small proportion of parents who actively refused vaccination by returning a negative consent form were more likely to come from more advantaged areas (P<0·001). Non-responding parents were from more deprived (P<0·001) and ethnic minority (P=0·001) backgrounds. Girls who did not receive HPV vaccination were less likely to have received all their childhood immunizations particularly measles, mumps and rubella (MMR). Different approaches may be needed to maximize HPV vaccine uptake in engaged and non-responding parents, including ethnic-specific approaches for non-responders.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Human papillomavirus vaccination and social inequality: results from a prospective cohort study
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Human papillomavirus vaccination and social inequality: results from a prospective cohort study
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Human papillomavirus vaccination and social inequality: results from a prospective cohort study
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Author for correspondence: Dr S. A. Roberts, Health Methodology Research Group, School of Community Based Medicine, University Place, Jean McFarlane Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK. (Email: Steve.roberts@manchester.ac.uk)

References

Hide All
1.Rambout, L, et al. Prophylactic vaccination against human papillomavirus infection and disease in women: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2007; 177: 469479.
2.Kohli, M, et al. Estimating the long-term impact of a prophylactic human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine on the burden of cervical cancer in the UK. British Journal of Cancer 2007; 96: 143150.
3.Department of Health. Vaccination services – reducing inequalities in uptake. Department of Health 2005 January (www.dh.gov.uk/publications). Accessed 1 March 2009.
4.Middleton, E, Baker, D. Comparison of social distribution of immunisation with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, England, 1991–2001. British Medical Journal 2003; 326: 854.
5.Pearce, A, et al. Does primary immunisation status predict MMR uptake? Archives of Disease in Childhood 2009; 94: 4951.
6.Samad, L, et al. Differences in risk factors for partial and no immunisation in the first year of life: prospective cohort study. British Medical Journal 2006; 332: 13121313.
7.Heyderman, RS, et al. The incidence and mortality for meningococcal disease associated with area deprivation: an ecological study of hospital episode statistics. Archives of Disease in Childhood 2004; 89: 10641068.
8.Parikh, S, Brennan, P, Boffetta, P. Meta-analysis of social inequality and the risk of cervical cancer. International Journal of Cancer 2003; 105: 687691.
9.Smith, NR, Kelly, YJ, Nazroo, JY. Intergenerational continuities of ethnic inequalities in general health in England. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2009; 63: 253258.
10.Marlow, LA, Wardle, J, Waller, J. Attitudes to HPV vaccination among ethnic minority mothers in the UK: an exploratory qualitative study. Human Vaccination 2009; 5: 105110.
11.Brabin, L, et al. Uptake of first two doses of human papillomavirus vaccine by adolescent schoolgirls in Manchester: prospective cohort study. British Medical Journal 2008; 336: 10561058.
12.Stretch, R, et al. Parental attitudes and information needs in an adolescent HPV vaccination programme. British Journal of Cancer 2008; 99: 19081911.
13.Brabin, L, et al. Uptake of the third dose of human papillomavirus vaccine by adolescent schoolgirls in Manchester: a prospective cohort study. [See Rapid Response to Brabin et al. (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/336/7652/1056#205660).] British Medical Journal 2009; 336: 10561058.
14.Noble, M, et al. The English Indices of Deprivation 2007. London: Communities and Local Government: London, 2008.
15.R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2009.
16.Nazroo, JY. Genetic, cultural or socio-economic vulnerability? Explaining ethnic inequalities in health. Sociology of Health & Illness 1998; 20: 710730.
17.Webb, R, Richardson, J, Pickles, A. A population-based study of primary care predictors of non-attendance for cervical screening. Journal of Medical Screening 2004; 11: 135140.
18.Pearce, A, et al. Factors associated with uptake of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR) and use of single antigen vaccines in a contemporary UK cohort: prospective cohort study. British Medical Journal 2008; 336: 754757.
19.Hak, E, et al. Negative attitude of highly educated parents and health care workers towards future vaccinations in the Dutch childhood vaccination program. Vaccine 2005; 23: 31033107.
20.Hawker, JI, et al. Widening inequalities in MMR vaccine uptake rates among ethnic groups in an urban area of the UK during a period of vaccine controversy (1994–2000). Vaccine 2007; 25: 75167519.
21.Mixer, RE, Jamrozik, K, Newsom, D. Ethnicity as a correlate of the uptake of the first dose of mumps, measles and rubella vaccine. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2007; 61: 797801.
22.Srinivasan, R, et al. Ethnic differences in selective neonatal BCG immunisation: white British children miss out. Thorax 2006; 61: 247249.
23.Webb, R, et al. Uptake for cervical screening by ethnicity and place-of-birth: a population-based cross-sectional study. Journal of Public Health (Oxford) 2004; 26: 293296.

Keywords

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed