Table 3:

Demographic characteristics, laboratory site and cytology outcome, by vaccination dose

CharacteristicNo. (%) screened women
0 doses
n = 5712
1 dose
n = 327
2 doses
n = 490
≥ 3 doses
n = 3675
Age, yr*
 18120 (2.1)12 (3.7)25 (5.1)356 (9.7)
 19478 (8.4)61 (18.7)138 (28.2)1289 (35.1)
 202065 (36.2)128 (39.1)186 (38.0)1515 (41.2)
 213049 (53.4)126 (38.5)141 (28.8)515 (14.0)
Neighbourhood income quintile
 1 (lowest)1115 (19.5)66 (20.2)93 (19.0)607 (16.5)
 21170 (20.5)60 (18.3)100 (20.4)763 (20.8)
 31044 (18.3)57 (17.4)81 (16.5)667 (18.2)
 41201 (21.0)74 (22.6)115 (23.5)772 (21.0)
 5 (highest)1164 (20.4)68 (20.8)100 (20.4)857 (23.3)
 Missing18 (0.3)2 (0.6)1 (0.2)9 (0.2)
Residential address
 Rural1592 (27.9)81 (24.8)116 (23.7)1084 (29.5)
 Urban4102 (71.8)244 (74.6)373 (76.1)2582 (70.3)
 Missing18 (0.3)2 (0.6)1 (0.2)9 (0.2)
Laboratory services
 Laboratory 12143 (37.5)146 (44.6)201 (41.0)1457 (39.6)
 Laboratory 23569 (62.5)181 (55.4)289 (59.0)2218 (60.4)
Cytology outcome (worst result)§
 Negative4794 (83.9)280 (85.6)407 (83.1)3242 (88.2)
 Abnormal918 (16.1)47 (14.4)83 (16.9)433 (11.8)
 Low grade**846 (14.8)45 (13.8)82 (16.7)411 (11.2)
 High grade††72 (1.3)2 (0.6)1 (0.2)22 (0.6)
  • * Age when Pap test (worst result between Jan. 1, 2012, and Aug. 14, 2015) was performed.

  • Laboratory in Calgary.

  • Laboratory in Edmonton.

  • § Cytology with the worst result between Jan. 1, 2012, and Aug. 14, 2015.

  • Abnormal: both low-grade and high-grade abnormalities.

  • ** Low-grade cases: atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.

  • †† High-grade cases: atypical squamous cells, cannot rule out a high-grade lesion; or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.