Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of respondents who intended and did not intend to be vaccinated

From: Attitudes of undergraduate university women towards HPV vaccination: a cross-sectional study in Ottawa, Canada

Independent Variables:

Odds ratio for intention to be vaccinated (n = 99), versus no intention to be vaccinated (n = 105)

Univariate Analysis

Multivariate Analysis£

OR

95% CI

OR

95% CI

More negative attitude to HPV vaccination

0.49***

[0.39, 0.63]

0.50**

[0.35, 0.71]

Less influenced by vaccine cost

1.86*

[1.01, 3.40]

1.10

[0.47, 2.58]

Do not know enough about the vaccine

0.75

[0.41, 1.37]

1.20

[0.49, 2.92]

Doctor recommendation

5.21***

[2.45, 11.09]

4.48**

[1.42, 14.13]

Friends got it/were going to get the vaccine

6.05***

[2.78, 13.13]

2.41

[0.94, 6.19]

Susceptibility to HPV

1.50

[0.81, 2.76]

0.73

[0.28, 1.91]

Parent recommendation

2.31*

[1.23. 4.35]

0.70

[0.26, 1.86]

Protect me from developing cervical cancer

17.35***

[2.23, 135.09]

1.08

[0.09, 12.45]

Increased age (per year)

0.94

[0.81, 1.09]

0.81

[0.65, 1.00]

Ethnicity (White vs. not white)

0.51*

[0.29, 0.90]

0.50

[0.22, 1.15]

  1. Note: Those who did not intend to be vaccinated were used as the reference category (N = 105)
  2. * p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 ***p < 0.0001
  3. £Model fit: Hosmer and Lemeshow Goodness-of-fit Test, p = 0.75
Back to article page

BMC Women's Health

ISSN: 1472-6874

Contact us