Strategies implemented to increase HPV vaccine uptake and confidence among men who have sex with men and transgender people: A systematic review
Clinical Snapshot
PICO Framework
| P — Population | Men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender persons |
| I — Intervention | Strategies and interventions to increase HPV vaccine confidence and uptake |
| C — Comparator | Standard care or no intervention (implied) |
| O — Outcomes | HPV vaccine uptake rates and vaccine confidence measures |
Bottom Line
This systematic review identifies a critical evidence gap in HPV vaccination strategies for MSM and transgender populations. While only 16 studies were found describing 8 interventions, two main approaches emerged: integrating vaccination into existing health services and using digital platforms to generate demand. The limited evidence base, exclusively from high-income countries, suggests current strategies are insufficiently evaluated. For Australian clinicians, this highlights the need for targeted approaches within existing sexual health services and LGBTI+ friendly practices. Given PBS coverage and RACGP recommendations for HPV vaccination in MSM up to age 26, clinicians should prioritise opportunistic vaccination while advocating for more robust intervention research. The particular lack of transgender-focused studies represents a significant knowledge gap requiring urgent attention.
Key Findings
P Value: Not applicable for narrative synthesis
Effect Size: Not quantified - narrative synthesis only
Primary Outcome: HPV vaccine uptake and confidence among MSM and transgender persons
Nnt Or Sensitivity: Not calculated - insufficient data for quantitative analysis
Confidence Interval: Not provided
Clinical Application
Limited by small evidence base and lack of specific implementation guidance Relevant to Australian MSM and transgender populations, particularly given PBS coverage of HPV vaccination and RACGP guidelines recommending vaccination for MSM up to age 26 MSM and transgender persons in high-income healthcare settings
Abstract
Men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender persons are disproportionately affected by HPV-related disease. The HPV vaccine effectively prevents infection, but vaccine uptake remains suboptimal in this group. Thus, this systematic review aimed to synthesize the literature on interventions and strategies implemented to increase HPV vaccine confidence and uptake among MSM and transgender persons. Six databases were searched in May 2025. We assessed risk of bias and extracted and descriptively summarized key data through narrative synthesis and content analysis. Sixteen articles reporting on eight interventions were identified, all implemented in high-income settings. The interventions can be broadly categorized into two types: strategies to integrate HPV vaccination into existing health services and digital interventions aimed at generating vaccine demand. Overall, evidence remains limited on interventions to increase HPV vaccine uptake in these groups, particularly studies focusing on the needs of transgender persons.
References
- 1.Avermark, H., Tzirita, S., Radix, E., Sun, S., & Herzig van Wees, S. (2026). Strategies implemented to increase HPV vaccine uptake and confidence among men who have sex with men and transgender people: A systematic review. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2026.2681252
Related Research
JMIR human factors
Japanese Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale for Sexually Transmitted Infection-Related Chatbots: Development and Psychometric Validation Study
24 July 2026
The Journal of dermatological treatment
Intralesional human papillomavirus vaccination for cutaneous verrucae: a systematic review and meta-analysis of therapeutic efficacy
30 June 2026
The New Zealand medical journal
Cancer risk and screening in transgender and gender-diverse individuals on gender-affirming hormone therapy: a review article for the Australasian context
31 May 2026
This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service