College Students' Digital Media Preferences for future HPV Vaccine Campaigns.

In the USA, although college-aged populations are at the greatest risk for initial infection with human papillomavirus (HPV), they are one of the age-based populations with lower HPV vaccine rates, largely due to their lack of perceived need to vaccinate against HPV. Health communication campaigns can help address this perception. This research identifies college students' preferred digital media channels for future HPV vaccine communication campaigns. We conducted qualitative small group interviews with 28 students from one large southwestern university. We used an inductive approach to hand-code interview transcripts, develop a coding structure, and analyze themes that emerged from the data. More than half of the study participants had never heard of the HPV vaccine before participating in a small group interview. When asked how they prefer to receive information about the vaccine, students more often recommended creating educational videos featuring healthcare providers and other college students and sharing them on YouTube. Some students recommended creating and posting health information memes and infographics to Instagram to disseminate the most critical information students need to make an informed decision to receive the vaccine. Given the prominent role of social media and the popularity of video-sharing and image-sharing sites, health educators and communicators should utilize these technologies to promote the HPV vaccine, a cancer prevention resource.

Rural Caregivers' Willingness for Community Pharmacists to Administer the HPV Vaccine to Their Age-Eligible Children.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination uptake varies by geographic regions with rural, often medically underserved areas, lagging behind more urban regions in terms of vaccine initiation and completion. In these regions, pharmacies may serve as an additional location for HPV vaccine administration. Little is known about rural caregivers' willingness to have their HPV vaccine age-eligible children obtain this vaccine from their local pharmacist. First and second authors conducted 26 in-depth interviews with caregivers of HPV vaccine age-eligible children living in rural regions of a southwestern state to explore their perceptions of the HPV vaccine and their willingness for pharmacist-administered HPV vaccination. They analyzed interview data using an inductive qualitative content analyses approach. The majority of caregivers were unaware that pharmacists could offer adolescent vaccines. However, most were willing to allow their children to receive the vaccine from this non-traditional source. Comments related to obtaining vaccinations from pharmacists related mostly to concerns about proper training and their certification to vaccinate against HPV. Caregivers believed that having a pharmacist administer the HPV vaccine would not affect their relationship with their primary care provider. Caregivers preferred print health education resources and were interested in also receiving health information via social media to learn more about the HPV vaccine and pharmacists' role in HPV vaccine administration. Pharmacies may serve as an additional site to increase HPV vaccine initiation and completion. Rural regions need additional health information about the HPV vaccine and pharmacists' abilities to administer this cancer prevention resource.

Contrasting cumulative risk and multiple individual risk models of the relationship between Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and adult health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: A very large body of research documents relationships between self-reported Adverse Childhood Experiences (srACEs) and adult health outcomes. Despite multiple assessment tools that use the same or similar questions, there is a great deal of inconsistency in the operationalization of self-reported childhood adversity for use as a predictor variable. Alternative conceptual models are rarely used and very limited evidence directly contrasts conceptual models to each other. Also, while a cumulative numeric 'ACE Score' is normative, there are differences in the way it is calculated and used in statistical models. We investigated differences in model fit and performance between the cumulative ACE Score and a 'multiple individual risk' (MIR) model that enters individual ACE events together into prediction models. We also investigated differences that arise from the use of different strategies for coding and calculating the ACE Score. METHODS: We merged the 2011-2012 BRFSS data (N = 56,640) and analyzed 3 outcomes. We compared descriptive model fit metrics and used Vuong's test for model selection to arrive at best fit models using the cumulative ACE Score (as both a continuous or categorical variable) and the MIR model, and then statistically compared the best fit models to each other. RESULTS: The multiple individual risk model was a better fit than the categorical ACE Score for the 'lifetime history of depression' outcome. For the outcomes of obesity and cardiac disease, the cumulative risk and multiple individual risks models were of comparable fit, but yield different and complementary inferences. CONCLUSIONS: Additional information-rich inferences about ACE-health relationships can be obtained from including a multiple individual risk modeling strategy. Results suggest that investigators working with large srACEs data sources could empirically derive the number of items, as well as the exposure coding strategy, that are a best fit for the outcome under study. A multiple individual risk model could also be considered in addition to the cumulative risk model, potentially in place of estimation of unadjusted ACE-outcome relationships.

What Do Adults Think About Their Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), and Does It Matter?

We examined the self-reported adulthood impact of adverse childhood experiences (ACE's), including both the amount (magnitude) and type (valence positive or negative) of impact reported, in order to characterize variability in impact ratings, as well as to quantify their predictive ability with respect to health outcomes. We descriptively characterized impact by type of event and analyzed associations between impact ratings and demographic characteristics of respondents to explore resilience. We also analyzed the relationships between impact ratings and health outcomes. We found that, while there was wide variability in impact ratings, emotional abuse was rated as the most impactful in magnitude, and sexual and emotional abuse were rated as the most negatively impactful in terms of valence. We further found that impact ratings are predictive of adult health outcomes above and beyond the experience of the events alone. We conclude that perceived impact is a potentially important variable to include when self-reported ACEs are assessed.

Administering the HPV Vaccine to People Living with HIV: Providers' Perspectives.

HIV-positive patients suffer disproportionate burden of anal cancer, a disease which is primarily caused by persistent infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) and is potentially preventable with the completion of the HPV vaccine series. Past research qualitatively explored HIV-positive patients' perspectives about the HPV vaccine. However, little is known about their healthcare practitioners' vaccine recommendation behaviors, the strongest influence on vaccine uptake. This study reports on in-depth interviews conducted with 25 healthcare practitioners who provide care for HIV-positive patients. Qualitative themes that emerged from the study included clinicians' HPV vaccination behaviors, HIV patient's willingness to get the HPV vaccine, the role of HIV-positive patients' immune functioning in terms of timing of HPV vaccine administration, and vaccinating HIV-positive patients over age 26. The majority of providers offered the vaccine at their healthcare facility. Participants varied in their opinions related to the importance of patients' CD4 count in terms of timing of HPV vaccine administration; some believed that patients' immune functioning should first be stabilized to receive the most benefit from the vaccine series. They also differed in the perceived benefit of offering the vaccine to patients over age 26. In light of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's recent approval to extend HPV vaccination to adults up to age 45 years, more HIV-positive adults may benefit by receiving this vaccine series. Future efforts should ensure that providers regularly promote the HPV vaccine to their adult HIV-positive patients. Vaccinating HIV-positive patients may help reduce the burden of HPV-related cancers, particularly anal cancer.

Screening for anal cancer precursors among patients living with HIV in the absence of national guidelines: practitioners' perspectives.

PURPOSE: Immunocompromised populations including people living with HIV (PLWH) suffer disproportionate burden from anal cancer, a rare cancer caused by persistent infection of the anal canal with oncogenic strains of human papillomavirus. In the US, there are no nationally adopted screening guidelines for anal cancer. In the absence of such guidelines, this study explores healthcare practitioners' screening practices for early signs of anal cancer among PLWH. METHODS: Between November 2017 and June 2018, the research team completed 25 interviews among a diverse sample of healthcare practitioners who provide care for PLWH. RESULTS: Providers expressed frustration that screening and treatment guidelines for anal cancer were scant, and they varied in their screening practices. The majority of providers screened PLWH for anal dysplasia via the anal Pap smear; few providers were trained and had the medical equipment to conduct high-resolution anoscopy-guided biopsies, a more sensitive and specific screening method. Others screened through digital ano-rectal examinations (DARE) and both visually and with a DARE. Participants discussed how providers may be over-treating their patients who have high-grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN) and the role of biomarkers to determine whether the lesion is carcinogenic. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners who provide care for PLWH are proactive in screening to help prevent and control anal cancer, a rare and slow-growing disease. Continuing to regularly surveil high-risk populations, particularly PLWH previously diagnosed with high-grade lesions, is critical to prevent and control anal cancer.

A Summary Report from the Research Partnership on Women in Science Careers.

BACKGROUND: In response to the landmark report "Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering," the NIH Office of Research on Women's Health issued a request for applications that funded 14 R01 grants to investigate causal factors to career success for women in STEM. Following completion of the 4-year grants, the grant PIs formed a grassroots collaborative, the Research Partnership on Women in Science Careers. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the work of the Research Partnership, which resulted in over 100 publications. METHODS: We developed six themes to organize the publications, with a "Best Practices" for each theme at the end of each section: Barriers to Career Advancement; Mentoring, Coaching, and Sponsorship; Career Flexibility and Work-Life Balance; Pathways to Leadership; Compensation Equity; and Advocating for Change and Stakeholder Engagement. RESULTS: Women still contend with sexual harassment, stereotype threat, a disproportionate burden of family responsibilities, a lack of parity in compensation and resource allocation, and implicit bias. Strategies to address these barriers using the Bronfenbrenner ecological model at the individual, interpersonal, institutional, academic community, and policy levels include effective mentoring and coaching, having a strong publication record, addressing prescriptive gender norms, positive counter-stereotype imaging, career development training, networking, and external career programs such as the AAMC Early and Mid-Career Programs and Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM). CONCLUSIONS: Cultural transformation is needed to address the barriers to career advancement for women. Implementing the best practices noted of the work of the Research Partnership can help to achieve this goal.

Disclosing neuroimaging incidental findings: a qualitative thematic analysis of health literacy challenges.

BACKGROUND: Returning neuroimaging incidental findings (IF) may create a challenge to research participants' health literacy skills as they must interpret and make appropriate healthcare decisions based on complex radiology jargon. Disclosing IF can therefore present difficulties for participants, research institutions and the healthcare system. The purpose of this study was to identify the extent of the health literacy challenges encountered when returning neuroimaging IF. We report on findings from a retrospective survey and focus group sessions with major stakeholders involved in disclosing IF. METHODS: We surveyed participants who had received a radiology report from a research study and conducted focus groups with participants, parents of child participants, Institutional Review Board (IRB) members, investigators and physicians. Qualitative thematic analyses were conducted using standard group-coding procedures and descriptive summaries of health literacy scores and radiology report outcomes are examined. RESULTS: Although participants reported high health literacy skills (m = 87.3 on a scale of 1-100), 67 % did not seek medical care when recommended to do so; and many participants in the focus groups disclosed they could not understand the findings described in their report. Despite their lack of understanding, participants desire to have information about their radiology results, and the investigators feel ethically inclined to return findings. CONCLUSIONS: The language in clinically useful radiology reports can create a challenge for participants' health literacy skills and has the potential to negatively impact the healthcare system and investigators conducting imaging research. Radiology reports need accompanying resources that explain findings in lay language, which can help reduce the challenge caused by the need to communicate incidental findings.

Viewing Focus Groups Through a Critical Incident Lens.

Scholars often do not describe in detail the complex process of conducting focus groups, including what happens when they take unexpected turns. A critical incident lens provides a framework for better analyzing and understanding what actually happens during focus group sessions. Using a critical incident approach, we examine our experiences of carrying out focus groups about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine with vaccine-eligible adolescent girls and parents/caregivers of vaccine-eligible adolescent girls in New Mexico. The critical incident lens allowed us to productively explore the context and interactional dynamics of our focus groups and ultimately pushed us to talk through the challenges of conducting and analyzing them. We hope this serves as a call to qualitative researchers to be attentive to the critical incidents in your own research to enrich your analysis and contribute to a broader discussion of the realities of focus group conduct.

Catching Up With the HPV Vaccine: Challenges and Opportunities in Primary Care.

PURPOSE: Data confirm that high rates of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination have not been achieved despite strong clinician endorsement of the vaccine. We conducted a study of primary care clinicians to assess the broad range of health care delivery, health policy, and attitudinal factors influencing vaccination uptake and opportunities for informed decision making. METHODS: We implemented a mixed methods study in RIOS Net, a primary care practice-based research network in New Mexico. We first conducted qualitative, in-depth interviews with primary care clinicians, health policy makers, and immunization experts, and followed up with a confirmatory survey distributed to RIOS Net clinician members. RESULTS: Health service delivery challenges emerged as the greatest barrier to HPV vaccination, specifically the lack of capacity to track and distribute reminders to eligible patients. Clinicians also reported variations in counseling approaches attributable to both age and emphasis on the cancer prevention benefits of the vaccine. There was no evidence of sociocultural influences on vaccine decision making, nor did concerns about perceived overprotection emerge. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, based on a long-term program of research, suggest that both patients' attributes and health system delivery are most influential in HPV vaccination coverage challenges. Interventions targeting innovative communication techniques, as well as health system changes that build on efforts toward coordinated care and utilization of other venues to promote vaccination, will be necessary to address these challenges.

'Ethical responsibility' or 'a whole can of worms': differences in opinion on incidental finding review and disclosure in neuroimaging research from focus group discussions with participants, parents, IRB members, investigators, physicians and community members.

PURPOSE: To identify the specific needs, preferences and expectations of the stakeholders impacted by returning neuroimaging incidental findings to research participants. METHODS: Six key stakeholder groups were identified to participate in focus group discussions at our active neuroimaging research facility: Participants, Parents of child participants, Investigators, Institutional Review Board (IRB) Members, Physicians and Community Members. A total of 151 subjects attended these discussions. Transcripts were analysed using principles of Grounded Theory and group consensus coding. RESULTS: A series of similar and divergent themes were identified across our subject groups. Similarities included beliefs that it is ethical for researchers to disclose incidental findings as it grants certain health and emotional benefits to participants. All stakeholders also recognised the potential psychological and financial risks to disclosure. Divergent perspectives elucidated consistent differences between our 'Participant' subjects (Participants, Parents, Community Members) and our 'Professional' subjects (IRB Members, Investigators and Physicians). Key differences included (1) what results should be reported, (2) participants' autonomous right to research information and (3) the perception of the risk-benefit ratio in managing results. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the perceived impact on all stakeholders involved in the process of disclosing incidental findings is necessary to determine appropriate research management policy. Our data further demonstrate the challenge of this task as different stakeholders evaluate the balance between risk and benefit related to their unique positions in this process. These findings offer some of the first qualitative insight into the expectations of the diverse stakeholders affected by incidental finding disclosure.

Don't Step on the Tiger's Tail: A Mixed Methods Study of the Relationship Between Adult Impact of Childhood Adversity and Use of Coping Strategies.

A mixed methods study examined the relationship between childhood adversity (ACE) and coping among individuals grouped by perceived impact of ACE in adulthood. Groups did not differ on mean total ACE scores and total ACE score was not associated with any coping strategy. Differences between groups were found in 6 of 14 coping strategies. Planning and active coping were endorsed the most by both groups, despite their being used in significantly different amounts and in different ways. How individuals with ACE rate its impact in their current lives is a significant factor in the use and meaning of coping strategies.

Different models of HPV vaccine decision-making among adolescent girls, parents, and health-care clinicians in New Mexico.

OBJECTIVE: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates in the United States have been lower than anticipated since the vaccine became widely available globally in 2006. Of particular concern are data that suggest disparities in vaccine receipt among US ethnic minority and health disparity populations such as Hispanics, who are disproportionately affected by cervical cancer. Given these trends, it is important to examine actual vaccination decision-making processes among clinicians, parents, and adolescents to identify strategies to enhance uptake. DESIGN: We conducted a mixed-method study examining HPV vaccine decision-making, utilizing both structured questionnaires of primarily Hispanic mothers and daughters (aged 12-18) and semi-structured interviews with mothers, daughters, and health-care clinicians to more deeply investigate decision-making dynamics. Quantitative analysis was used for descriptive purposes, while qualitative analysis featured an iterative process to examine factors related to decision-making surrounding the HPV vaccine. The study was conducted in two primary care clinics serving predominantly Hispanic patients in an urban New Mexico setting through Research Involving Outpatient Setting Network (RIOS Net), a primary care practice-based research network. RESULTS: We administered 22 questionnaires and conducted 30 interviews. We identified three aspects of vaccine delivery that were similar across clinics: availability/supply of the vaccine, favorable clinician attitudes toward the vaccine, and clinicians' competing demands. We also identified three decision-making stages (pre-encounter, encounter, and post-encounter), though we found distinct differences in decision-making processes at the two sites. We describe the differences between an encounter-based and a process-based model of decision-making, and the ways in which explanatory factors might influence the decision-making process. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that factors other than race and ethnicity, such as education, socioeconomic status, and health-care access, play an important role in HPV vaccination decisions. Further research to elucidate the specific informational needs and communication strategies associated with these factors will be needed to enhance vaccine uptake.

Negative affect predicts adults' ratings of the current, but not childhood, impact of adverse childhood events.

Adverse childhood events (ACE's) have been empirically related to a wide range of negative health and mental health outcomes. However, not all individuals who experience ACE's follow a trajectory of poor outcomes, and not all individuals perceive the impact of ACE's as necessarily negative. The purpose of this study was to investigate positive and negative affect as predictors of adults' ratings of both the childhood and adult impact of their childhood adversity. Self-report data on ACE experiences, including number, severity, and 'impact' were collected from 158 community members recruited on the basis of having adverse childhood experiences. Results indicated that, regardless of event severity and number of different types of adverse events experienced, high levels of negative affect were the strongest predictor of whether the adult impact of the adverse childhood events was rated as negative. All individuals rated the childhood impact of events the same. Implications are discussed.

Sharing Reliable COVID-19 Information and Countering Misinformation: In-Depth Interviews With Information Advocates.

BACKGROUND: The rampant spread of misinformation about COVID-19 has been linked to a lower uptake of preventive behaviors such as vaccination. Some individuals, however, have been able to resist believing in COVID-19 misinformation. Further, some have acted as information advocates, spreading accurate information and combating misinformation about the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This work explores highly knowledgeable information advocates' perspectives, behaviors, and information-related practices. METHODS: To identify participants for this study, we used outcomes of survey research of a national sample of 1498 adults to find individuals who scored a perfect or near-perfect score on COVID-19 knowledge questions and who also self-reported actively sharing or responding to news information within the past week. Among this subsample, we selected a diverse sample of 25 individuals to participate in a 1-time, phone-based, semistructured interview. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and the team conducted an inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants reported trusting in science, data-driven sources, public health, medical experts, and organizations. They had mixed levels of trust in various social media sites to find reliable health information, noting distrust in particular sites such as Facebook (Meta Platforms) and more trust in specific accounts on Twitter (X Corp) and Reddit (Advance Publications). They reported relying on multiple sources of information to find facts instead of depending on their intuition and emotions to inform their perspectives about COVID-19. Participants determined the credibility of information by cross-referencing it, identifying information sources and their potential biases, clarifying information they were unclear about with health care providers, and using fact-checking sites to verify information. Most participants reported ignoring misinformation. Others, however, responded to misinformation by flagging, reporting, and responding to it on social media sites. Some described feeling more comfortable responding to misinformation in person than online. Participants' responses to misinformation posted on the internet depended on various factors, including their relationship to the individual posting the misinformation, their level of outrage in response to it, and how dangerous they perceived it could be if others acted on such information. CONCLUSIONS: This research illustrates how well-informed US adults assess the credibility of COVID-19 information, how they share it, and how they respond to misinformation. It illustrates web-based and offline information practices and describes how the role of interpersonal relationships contributes to their preferences for acting on such information. Implications of our findings could help inform future training in health information literacy, interpersonal information advocacy, and organizational information advocacy. It is critical to continue working to share reliable health information and debunk misinformation, particularly since this information informs health behaviors.

Addressing the "other" health literacy competencies--knowledge, dispositions, and oral/aural communication: development of TALKDOC, an intervention assessment tool.

Most health literacy assessments evaluate literacy skills including reading, writing; numeracy and interpretation of tables, graphs, diagrams and charts. Some assess understanding of health systems, and the ability to adequately apply one's skills to specific health-related tasks or demands in health situations. However, to achieve functional health literacy, the ability to "obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions," other health literacy dimensions should be assessed: a person's knowledge and attitudes about a health issue affects his or her ability to and interest in participating in his or her own care. In patient care settings, the abilities to listen, ask questions and check one's understanding are crucial to making appropriate decisions and carrying out instructions. Although literacy is a skill associated with educational attainment and therefore difficult to change in a short time, health education interventions can address health literacy domains such as knowledge, attitudes and oral communication skills. For this reason, an instrument that can assess these constructs is a valuable part of a health educator's toolbox. The authors describe the development and process and outcomes of testing a novel instrument targeted to assess HPV and cervical cancer health literacy competencies, TALKDOC, including its validation with the Health Activities Literacy Scale.

Expressions of machismo in colorectal cancer screening among New Mexico Hispanic subpopulations.

Although national colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates have steadily decreased, the rate for New Mexico Hispanics has been increasing, and screening rates are low. We conducted an exploratory qualitative study to determine barriers to CRC screening for New Mexico Hispanics. We found that machismo served as a dynamic influence on men's health-seeking behaviors; however, it was conceptualized differently by two distinct Hispanic subpopulations, and therefore appeared to play a different role in shaping their screening attitudes and behaviors. Machismo emerged as more of an influence for Mexican men, who expressed concern over colonoscopies being potentially transformative and/or stigmatizing, but was not as salient for Hispanos, who viewed the colonoscopy as "strictly medical," and were more concerned with discomfort and pain. Findings from the study highlight the importance of identifying varying characteristics among subpopulations to better understand screening barriers and provide optimal CRC screening counseling in primary care settings.

Direct and indirect effects of childhood adversity on adult depression.

Exposure to adverse events in childhood is a predictor of subsequent exposure to adverse events in adulthood, and both are predictors of depression in adults. The degree to which adult depression has a direct effect of childhood adversity versus an indirect effect mediated by adult adversity has not previously been reported. We report data collected from 210 adult participants regarding childhood and adult adversity and current symptoms of depression. Mediation of the relationship between childhood adversity and adult depression by adult adversity was statistically assessed to evaluate the relative direct and indirect effects of childhood adversity on current depression levels in adults. Both the direct effect of childhood adversity on adult depression and the indirect effect, mediated by adulthood events, were significant. Therefore, partial mediation of the relationship between childhood adversity and adult symptoms of depression by adult adverse events was found in the sample. Implications for treatment are presented.

Influences on male college students' patient-provider communications and uptake behaviors related to the human papillomavirus vaccine.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the psychosocial influences on college males' human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine patient-provider communication and their uptake of one or more HPV vaccine doses. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey with college males attending one large southwestern university. We used logistic regressions to explore the relationships between psychosocial and demographic variables on patient-provider communication and HPV vaccine uptake. RESULTS: Patient-provider communication had the most significant influence on HPV vaccine uptake. However, most college males reported never discussing the HPV vaccine with their healthcare providers. HPV vaccine awareness, perceived subjective norms to vaccinate, and behavioral control to talk to healthcare providers about the vaccine significantly influenced college males' patient-provider communication and vaccine uptake. CONCLUSION: HPV vaccine awareness, perceived behavioral control to communicate about the vaccine, and subjective norms to vaccinate are all addressable factors that influence HPV vaccine communication and uptake. Future intervention work should specifically target these factors for college men.

The feasibility and acceptability of a pilot randomized controlled trial testing pharmacy-based HPV vaccine completion.

OBJECTIVE: Immunizing pharmacists can administer vaccines; however, they are less likely to administer adolescent vaccines such as vaccines that protect against human papillomavirus (HPV). Although past research has recommended incorporating pharmacists to increase adolescent vaccination, few intervention studies have tested healthcare delivery models that incorporate pharmacists to aid in vaccine series completion. This research explored the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention in which pharmacists administered booster doses of the HPV vaccine series. METHODS: Between April 2019 and February 2020, the research team recruited participants for a pilot randomized controlled trial hosted in one federally qualified health center (FQHC) clinic. Researchers asked intervention group participants to complete the HPV vaccine series with their community pharmacists and control group participants to complete the series at their FQHC. We conducted a pre- and post-intervention surveys and in-depth interviews with both intervention and control group participants. RESULTS: A total of 33 parents of children who received the first dose of the HPV vaccine enrolled in the study of whom 8 intervention and 11 control group participants completed post-intervention data collection. Although there were no statistically significant changes in vaccine completion and in psychometric variables, we did find that pharmacist-delivered HPV vaccination was acceptable, due, primarily, to convenience. Barriers to receiving pharmacist-administered vaccines included pharmacies' lack of stocking the vaccine and insurance-related barriers to care. CONCLUSION: Although a promising and acceptable healthcare delivery approach, there are still barriers for caregivers to have their children vaccinated against HPV at their community pharmacies.