4.5 Article

The effect of school-based cervical cancer education on perceptions towards human papillomavirus vaccination among Hong Kong Chinese adolescent girls

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 84, 期 1, 页码 118-122

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.018

关键词

Cervical cancer; HPV vaccination; School-based health education; Chinese adolescent girls

资金

  1. Wong Check She Charitable Foundation
  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Hong Kong

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To evaluate the effects of school-based cervical cancer education on Hong Kong Chinese adolescent girls. Methods: Adolescent girls (n = 953) in local secondary schools attended a tailored educational program on cervical cancer prevention. Self-administered questionnaires were used before and after the program to measure its effects on participants' knowledge, attitude and perceived social norms towards human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and their intention to be HPV vaccinated. Results: Before the program. HPV vaccine acceptance was favorable but relevant knowledge was low. After the program, participants had greater knowledge and a more positive attitude (both p < 0.001), with more girls anticipating family (41.6% before vs. 58.9% after) and peer support (32.8% before vs. 56.9% after). There were 11.3% more girls who indicated an intention to accept the vaccine afterward. More knowledge, a more positive attitude and perceived support from significant others predicted a stronger intention to be HPV vaccinated. Conclusion: The educational program had a positive impact on participants' perceptions towards HPV vaccination and their intention to be vaccinated. Practice implications: School-based cervical cancer education is a viable means to meet the substantial educational needs of adolescents. Promotion of HPV vaccination should also include educating and influencing perceptions of families and peers. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据