↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the acceptability of incentivising HPV vaccination consent form return as a means of increasing uptake

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, March 2018
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
28 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Assessing the acceptability of incentivising HPV vaccination consent form return as a means of increasing uptake
Published in
BMC Public Health, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5278-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lauren Rockliffe, Amanda J. Chorley, Emily McBride, Jo Waller, Alice S. Forster

Abstract

Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is high overall but there are disparities in uptake, particularly by ethnicity. Incentivising vaccination consent form return is a promising approach to increase vaccination uptake. As part of a randomised feasibility trial we qualitatively assessed the acceptability of increasing uptake of HPV vaccination by incentivising consent form return. In the context of a two-arm, cluster randomised feasibility trial, qualitative free-text questionnaire responses were collected from adolescent girls (n = 181) and their parents (n = 61), assessing the acceptability of an incentive intervention to increase HPV vaccination consent form return. In the incentive intervention arm, girls who returned a signed consent form (regardless of whether consent was given or refused), had a 1-in-10 chance of winning a £50 shopping voucher. Telephone interviews were also conducted with members of staff from participating schools (n = 6), assessing the acceptability of the incentive. Data were analysed thematically. Girls and parents provided a mix of positive, negative and ambivalent responses about the use of the incentive to encourage HPV vaccination consent form return. Both girls and parents held misconceptions about the nature of the incentive, wrongly believing that the incentive was dependent on vaccination receipt rather than consent form return. School staff members also expressed a mix of opinions on the acceptability of the incentive, including perceptions of effectiveness and ethics. The use of an incentive intervention to encourage the return of HPV vaccination consent forms was found to be moderately acceptable to those receiving and delivering the intervention, although a number of changes are required to improve this. In particular, improving communication about the nature of the incentive to reduce misconceptions is vital. These findings suggest that incentivising consent form return may be an acceptable means of improving HPV vaccination rates, should improvements be made. ISRCTN Registry; ISRCTN72136061 , 26 September 2016, retrospectively registered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 19%
Student > Bachelor 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Researcher 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 34 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 20 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 14%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Psychology 6 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 37 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 29 May 2018.
All research outputs
#1,995,577
of 25,055,009 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,263
of 16,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,298
of 337,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#67
of 316 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,055,009 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,717 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 337,813 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 316 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.