Skip to content

✪ A framework policy analysis of single-dose HPV vaccination adoption in East Africa: a rapid review

Authors:

Grace Umutesi, Bryan J. Weiner, Teresa Jewell, Saidi Kapiga, Jeff Lane, Nelly R. Mugo & Ruanne V. Barnabas

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: March 2026

Read the full text in the open access journal BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:

Cervical cancer is a global public health problem. While HPV vaccination effectively prevents cervical cancer, vaccination coverage remains low in low -and middle-income countries (LMICs) where around 94% of cervical cancer-related deaths occur. To improve coverage and accelerate progress toward achieving cervical cancer elimination, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended that countries switch to a single-dose HPV vaccination schedule in 2022. Despite strong evidence of the health and economic benefits of a single-dose HPV vaccination schedule, its adoption has varied across countries.

We sought to rapidly review existing evidence to assess the “how” of policy reform on HPV vaccination, leveraging a policy analysis of single-dose HPV vaccination adoption in three East African countries. We used the Health Policy Triangle Framework (HPF) to compile key considerations that led to the adoption of single-dose HPV vaccination in Ethiopia, Uganda, and Tanzania. Relevant articles from peer-reviewed journals and grey literature published up to December 2024 were selected using pre-set inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted and summarized using a rapid qualitative analysis approach guided by the HPF. Twenty-four articles from academic and grey literature were examined.

Beyond context-specific aspects, a few common themes emerged across the three countries. Political will focused on addressing cervical cancer as a public health problem, and it was crucial to prioritize the revision of the HPV vaccination policy. The policy revision on the HPV vaccination schedule was undertaken, building on existing evidence and the WHO endorsement. Additionally, the availability of key evidence on the magnitude of this public health problem (eg: burden of the disease), the potential benefit of a single-dose schedule (efficacy, and the economic impact) played an important role in the policy revision process. At the national level, National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) that provided evidence-based guidance to policy-makers were central to the single-dose decision-making process. Our findings highlighted key considerations for the policy revision process in three East African countries, which could inform strategic policy decisions in these countries and comparable settings.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ Combining legal epidemiology and implementation science to improve global access to medicines: challenges and opportunities

Authors:

Jeff Lane & Andy Stergachis

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2024

Read the full text in the open access journal Frontiers in Health Services

Abstract:

Laws and policies affecting access to medicines have been in the global health spotlight for decades, yet our understanding of their effects remains substantially underdeveloped. The emerging field of legal epidemiology combined with the methods of implementation science presents an opportunity to help address this gap. Legal epidemiology refers to the scientific study and deployment of law as a factor in the cause, distribution, and prevention of disease and injury in a population. Legal epidemiology studies consist of a systematic collection and coding of laws and policies relating to a particular topic. Quasi-experimental or observational research methods can then be applied to take advantage of natural experiments resulting from heterogenous adoption and/or implementation of laws and policies.

Often legal epidemiology studies fail to account for heterogenous law implementation processes, presenting a need and opportunity to integrate implementation science methods. Researchers may face challenges in integrating these methods for access to medicines studies, including data access issues and a complex legal and implementation environment. Yet, the opportunities presented by increasingly transparent legal environments, improved monitoring of medicine availability, universal health coverage expansion, and electronic health and insurance records integration may facilitate overcoming these challenges. Improved collaboration and communication between researchers, health authorities, manufacturers, and health providers from public and private sectors will be critical. In spite of the challenges, combining the fields of legal epidemiology and implementation science may present an important strategy toward creating a legal and policy environment that supports global and equitable access to medicines.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**