Cited by 245Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchVaccine Coverage and HesitancyAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health

Parental attitudes to pre-pubertal HPV vaccination

Marlow, Laura A.V., Waller, Jo, Wardle, Jane·2007·Vaccine

Abstract

Objectives To determine the acceptability of childhood HPV vaccination and examine demographic, cultural, and psychosocial predictors of vaccine acceptance. Design School-based survey. Participants Questionnaires sent to 1205 mothers of 8-14-year-old girls. Responses from 684 were included in the analyses. Setting Ten schools (seven primary, three secondary) in four areas of England. Results Seventy-five percent of mothers would accept the vaccine for their daughter. Vaccine acceptance was higher in mothers who had experience of cancer in the family (OR=1.61, CI: 1.14-2.29), had older daughters (OR=1.15, CI: 1.04-1.27), perceived approval from husband/partner (OR=14.51, CI: 6.15-34.25) and believed vaccine acceptance would be more normative (OR=1.78, CI: 1.59-2.01). Having concerns about too many vaccinations (OR=0.22, CI: 0.15-0.31) or vaccine side effects (OR=0.37, CI: 0.28-0.50) and worry about increasing promiscuity (OR=0.47, CI: 0.36-0.62) emerged as deterrents. The modal preferred age was 12 years. Endorsing vaccination at earlier ages was predicted by feeling able to discuss related topics, including sex, at younger ages (OR=1.37, CI: 1.24-1.51) and concern about increasing promiscuity (OR=0.61, CI: 0.47-0.78). Conclusions Overall, there was a favourable response to HPV vaccination. Emphasising the widespread acceptance of the vaccine might promote acceptance further, as would information on immunological and social benefits of earlier vaccination.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.01.059

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Age-at-vaccination is an important factor in parental decision-making about immunizing daughters against HPV infection.

    “Studies have shown that age-at-vaccination is an important factor in parental decision-making about immunizing daughter against HPV infection (Marlow et al., 2007).”

    From Indian Parents Prefer Vaccinating their Daughters against HPV at Older Ages (2014) · cites this paper as Marlow et al., 2007

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marlow, L. A. V., Waller, J., & Wardle, J.
Affiliations
Cancer Research UK (GB)
Corresponding author
Wardle, Jane
Venue
Vaccine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-03
Volume
25
Issue
11
Pages
1945-1952
ISSN
0264-410X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2010543762
Cited by
245
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 17
FWCI
16.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Vaccine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Cancer Research UK
  • Sanofi Pasteur
  • Economic and Social Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Keywords
HPV vaccination, vaccine acceptance, parental attitudes, mothers, childhood immunization, vaccine hesitancy, perceived social norms, partner approval, family history of cancer, vaccine side effects, sexual health communication, school-based survey
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attitude to Health, Child, Data Collection, England, Female, Humans, Mothers, Parents, Surveys and Questionnaires, Vaccination, Papillomavirus Vaccines

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review