HPV, HPV Vaccination, Vaccine Acceptance, Vaccine Decision Making
Conditions
Keywords
Human papilloma virus, HPV vaccine, Vaccine uptake, Vaccine confidence
Brief summary
This study looks at a digital platform that supports HPV vaccination in schools. The goal is to see if it is useful, easy to use, and practical in real school settings, especially in areas where fewer people get vaccinated. Researchers will give Year 5 pupils (aged 11-12) and their parents or caregivers access to the platform. It provides clear, trusted information about the HPV vaccine for young people, parents, and school nurses. The aim is to make the vaccine easier to understand and to help answer any questions or concerns. After using the platform, participants will be asked to share their thoughts.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALHPV-Kompassen
HPV-Kompassen is a co-designed, web-based platform that provides tailored and synthesised information with the aim of strengthening confidence in and uptake of the HPV vaccine.
Sponsors
Karolinska Institutet
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
Single-arm, non-randomized cluster feasibility study using a mixed methods approach
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
We will aim to recruit 6-8 compulsory schools in Stockholm County to serve as clusters. All Year 5 pupils and their caregivers in the study schools are invited. Inclusion Criteria: * The school provides education to pupils in school year 5 and is scheduled to be open throughout the pilot trial period * The school is located in an area with HPV vaccine uptake \<85.2% (the Stockholm regional average) * The head principal and school nurse both consent to participate * The school has the capacity to implement the intervention
Exclusion criteria
* Failure to meet the inclusion criteria
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Feasibility of implementation: Acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of implementation | Shortly after the intervention period (i.e., 'end of treatment') at 7 months. | Measured using Weiner et al.'s implementation outcomes questionnaire (administered to school nurses in participating schools). The questionnaire consists of 12 statements, with four items each assessing the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), the Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), and the Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM). Respondents rate their level of agreement with each statement using a five-point Likert scale, ranging from "completely disagree" to "completely agree." Responses are coded numerically from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating stronger agreement. The 12 scores are summed to produce a total scale score ranging from 12 to 60, with higher scores reflecting more positive perceptions of the platform across the three implementation domains. |
| Acceptability of intervention: Intervention delivery strategy | Throughout the intervention period (i.e., months 0-7). | Defined as proportion of adolescents and caregivers that access platform at least once, measured through platform usage metrics. |
| Acceptability of intervention: Usability of intervention | Immediately after the intervention period (i.e., 'end of treatment') at 7 months. | Usability is measured quantitatively using the Swedish version of the System Usability Scale (SUS). The SUS consists of 10 items assessing perceived usability across key dimensions such as complexity, ease of use, and confidence in using the system. Participants (school nurses, adolescents and caregivers) indicate their agreement with each item on a five-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." Responses are scored according to standard SUS procedures, resulting in a total score ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better perceived usability. |
| Acceptability of intervention: Perceptions of intervention | Shortly after the intervention period (i.e., 'end of treatment') at 7 months. | Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with participants (school nurses, adolescents and caregivers), focusing on their perceptions of the intervention. An interview guide is used to ensure coverage of key domains while allowing flexibility to explore individual experiences in depth. The guide includes open-ended questions assessing implementation (see outcome measure 2) and perceptions of the intervention, such as "Can you briefly describe your experience of using HPV-Kompassen?" and "Did the information seem credible to you?". |
| Acceptability of intervention: Intervention engagement | Throughout the intervention period (i.e., months 0-7). | Defined as proportion of adolescents and caregivers that actively engage with the platform least once (e.g., visit different modules), measured through platform usage metrics. |
| Feasibility of trial protocol: Feasibility of recruitment | From start of school enrollment (i.e., pre-intervention) and throughout the intervention period (i.e., months 0-7). | Measured through study notes, assessing two indicators: proportion of schools that consent to participate and proportion of participants that consent to participate in interviews. |
| Feasibility of trial protocol: Participant retention | From school enrollment (i.e., 'baseline') and throughout the intervention period (i.e., months 0-7). | Measured using study records and platform metrics, assessing two indicators: Proportion of schools retained until study end and proportion of participants using platform who complete the end line survey. |
| Feasibility of trial protocol: Feasibility of data collection methods | Shortly after the intervention period (i.e., 'end of treatment') at 7 months. | Measured using study records and survey data, assessing the completeness of data. |
Contacts
CONTACTHelena Avermark
CONTACTAsha Mohamed Ibrahim
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORSibylle Herzig van Wees, Associate Professor
Karolinska Institutet
Outcome results
None listed