Skip to main content
  • Research article
  • Open access
  • Published:

Development of an educational package for the universal human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme: a co-production study with young people and key informants



The English schools-based human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme is routinely offered to all young people aged 12–13 years, to prevent cancers affecting the cervix, vulva, vagina, penis, anus and mouth. Lower uptake among some population groups has been identified, in part, because of unmet information needs among young people. To address these unmet needs we report intervention planning and development processes to co-produce an educational package about the HPV vaccine.


We used co-production research methodologies and the ‘person-based approach’ involving the following iterative stages: (i) collating and analysing primary and secondary evidence, including HPV vaccine communication materials, interviews and workshops; (ii) developing guiding principles; (iii) undertaking a behavioural analysis informed by the Behaviour Change Wheel and the Behaviour Change Technique taxonomy; (iv) development of a preliminary logic model; (v) co-production of resources, and; (vi) refinement of resources informed by feedback from young people and key informants.


We co-produced EDUCATE, a theory-based educational package, that is designed to be delivered to young people prior to being offered the HPV vaccine to support uptake. Young people and key informants identified the following key issues to include as content: (i) HPV-related information; (ii) how vaccines work; (iii) safety and side-effects of the HPV vaccine; (iii) eligibility for the HPV vaccination programme, and; (iv) preparation of young people to receive the HPV vaccine. A manual for professionals (e.g. immunisation nurses, school staff) delivering the intervention and a PowerPoint presentation, interspersed with five short films, were co-produced with young people and key informants. Following feedback, the content of the EDUCATE package was refined to increase acceptability, engagement, and persuasiveness to the target users.


Engagement with young people and key informants was integral to the development of our rigorously developed, theory-based intervention to address young people’s information needs about the HPV vaccination programme. The acceptability and persuasiveness of the package has been maximised by working closely with young people and key informants to develop the content. An implementation study to examine how the EDUCATE package is implemented in practice and the impact on uptake of the HPV vaccination programme is underway.

Plain English summary

In England, young people are offered the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in schools at age 12–13 years to prevent some types of cancer. Some young people have unanswered questions which may stop them getting vaccinated. We report how we developed a lesson about the HPV vaccine jointly with young people and professionals to improve how information about the HPV vaccine is given. First, we reviewed research studies and HPV vaccine information materials designed for young people. Then, we carried out interviews and workshops to ask about the best way to give a lesson and the most important information to include. We worked with creative designers to produce films and animations. Finally, we asked young people and professionals for feedback on the lesson materials. The lesson includes a PowerPoint presentation with five films and guidance for people leading the session. Key topics about the HPV vaccine to be covered were identified by young people. These included information about how vaccines work and ways to improve young people’s experience of having the HPV vaccine at school. We made changes to the information in the lesson to ensure that it was relevant to young people. We are now carrying out a study to find out how well the lesson is given and whether it can help more young people get the HPV vaccine if they want it.

Peer Review reports


The human papillomavirus (HPV) is a common infection that is spread by skin-to-skin contact, including sexual contact. Although most infections are self-limiting, infection with low-risk HPV types can lead to the development of genital warts. In rare cases, persistent infection with high-risk HPV types can lead to the development of serious health conditions affecting both women and men, including cancers of the cervix, vulva, vagina, penis, anus, and or mouth [1].

In 2008, the English HPV vaccination programme was introduced with the aim of reducing cervical cancer incidence and associated mortality [2]. The programme was first offered to young women aged 12 to 13 years through a schools-based model of delivery. To further reduce the impact of HPV-related cancers and increasing evidence of cost-effectiveness [3], from 2019/20 the programme was expanded to include young men. Through universal coverage, men who have sex with men will also receive optimal protection by immunisation ahead of sexual debut [3, 4].

The English schools-based HPV vaccination programme exceeded the 80% coverage needed to impact on future incidence of cervical cancer. However, persistent lower uptake rates among minority ethnic groups and young people living in more deprived areas have been identified [5, 6]. Our research shows complex socio-cultural factors, including information needs among young people, influence beliefs and priorities for young people to be vaccinated [7, 8].

Challenges in communicating evidence-based messages in schools-based vaccination programmes also exist. Information leaflets, together with forms requesting parental consent, are usually distributed by the school to parents or carers. Immunisation teams often have limited opportunities to interact face-to-face with young people, or to frame and target specific HPV vaccine messages to young people with additional information needs [7]. Addressing young people’s unanswered questions may help increase uptake and narrow inequalities.

The international evidence from studies undertaken in Sweden, Italy, and Australia suggests that educational interventions delivered in the school-setting can be effective at increasing young people’s understanding about the HPV vaccine [9,10,11], and in some cases HPV vaccination uptake [9, 10]. This suggests that an educational intervention has the potential to be effective in the English schools-based vaccination programme.

Intervention planning and development

The Medical Research Council and the National Institute for Health Research 2021 guidance for the development and evaluation of complex interventions [12] recognises intervention development as the first of a series of interconnected steps of the development-evaluation-implementation process. Behavioural change interventions are often developed without a systematic method that draws on the evidence and theories [13]. Calls have been made for researchers to better report processes and decision-making to address under-reporting and increase clarity of intervention development [14].

This study aimed to co-produce an educational package tailored at increasing vaccine uptake in areas and populations with lower HPV vaccination coverage. At the conception stage, we drew upon our previous qualitative research findings [7] to develop an initial research plan for the co-production of an educational package that included question and answer sessions alongside a series of short videos. Co-production approaches involve sharing decision-making and including the expertise of the target users delivering and receiving an intervention [15]. By incorporating their perspectives, the acceptability, feasibility, and practicality of the intervention is addressed and maximised at the intervention development stage. Full details of the study methodology are provided in a published protocol [16].

The aim of this paper is to document the intervention planning and development processes we applied in a transparent manner. The specific objectives are to:

  1. 1.

    describe the process of involving target users (young people and key informants) throughout the development of the content for the educational package, and;

  2. 2.

    provide information about how their feedback shaped the design of the educational package.



The University of Bristol’s Faculty of Health Sciences, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine's Research Ethics Committees, and the National Health Service Health Research Authority provided approvals for the study (references: 99102, 21887 & 279670).

Research setting

Two geographically distinct areas in England with historically lower uptake of the HPV vaccination programme were selected as research sites: Bristol local authority and the London Borough of Southwark. These sites were selected as they build on existing relationships between the immunisation and research teams and where there was drive to improve delivery of the vaccination programme.


Our target population groups were young men and women aged 12–15 years and key informants (e.g. immunisation nurses, youth workers and school staff). The age group 12–15 years was selected as these young people were perceived to have diverse experiences in relation to having been offered the HPV vaccine through the programme.

Prior to funding being secured, preliminary discussions around participation were held in Bristol with two youth organisations. Following research permissions being granted, information about the study was also distributed by public health officials to managers of youth organisations within Southwark, London. One organisation responded to the invitation and agreed to take part. All three organisations work with young people with sociodemographic backgrounds that have been identified with lower uptake of the HPV vaccination programme [5, 6].

Young people were initially approached by a member of staff at the participating organisations and provided with written or electronic information about the study. The research team asked the member of staff to, where possible, invite both male and female young people from different ethnic backgrounds. However, young people were not asked to provide information related to their ethnic or socioeconomic background to the study researcher. Inevitably, selection was also influenced by members of staff’s perceptions of which young people would be willing to participate and engage with the study. The recruiting process was facilitated by the good relationships that the members of staff had developed with the young people they worked with.

Key informants were identified through the research teams existing relationships with youth organisations, immunisation teams, and schools in the study areas. An additional interview was undertaken with a sex and relationships educator who was identified as the activities progressed.

In total, 61 participants took part in the research activities within the study. Some participants contributed at multiple stages.

Intervention planning and development

We used the ‘person-based approach’ to intervention planning and development [17], which enabled us to develop an appropriate theory-, evidence-, and person-based framework to underpin the EDUCATE package. Incorporating the views of the target users (young people and professionals involved in delivery of the HPV vaccination programme) throughout the development, design, and testing processes increases the likelihood that the educational package will be acceptable, engaging, persuasive, and easy to use. In turn, this is intended to promote engagement, implementation and, ultimately, effectiveness [17].

The planning and development phases involved the following interrelated stages: (i) collating and analysing evidence; (ii) developing guiding principles; (iii) undertaking a behavioural analysis; (iv) development of a preliminary logic model; (v) co-production of the intervention, and; (vi) intervention refinement.

Further details on the methodology comprising each of these components are provided below.

Intervention planning methodology: collating and analysing evidence

The purpose of this stage was to collate primary and secondary evidence to understand behavioural issues that lead to lower HPV vaccination uptake in the target population groups, and the challenges of addressing these.

A scoping review of the relevant literature

As recommended by the ‘person-based approach’ [17], a scoping review was undertaken to collate evidence relating to the relevant behavioural issues. Key papers highlighting the relevant behavioural issues were identified from previous systematic reviews – supplemented by more recent work identified by the first author (HF). Additional handsearching of citations and reference lists supplemented the original documents identified.

Patient and public involvement

We consulted with members of the Bristol Young People’s Advisory Group (YPAG) ( and Bristol City Youth Council ( about the initial design of the study. The study manager (HF) also tested the initial prototype for the intervention by delivering HPV vaccine awareness raising sessions in two schools, one of which was delivered in collaboration with an immunisation nurse.

Members of the Bristol YPAG also provided feedback on participant information sheets and recruitment materials. Feedback included that there was too much content within the information sheet, preferences for a less ‘serious’ font and inclusion of more images. Changes to the format of the documents were made according to their feedback to ensure the materials were more appealing to young people.

Content analysis of existing HPV vaccine communication materials for young people

To inform the initial stages of the planned research, we summarised existing HPV vaccine communication materials that targeted young people and were published in the English language. The methodological approach is reported in full elsewhere [18].

Preliminary interviews and workshops

The findings from the content analysis were used to inform topic guides to seek further feedback and clarification from young people (n = 11) and key informants (n = 6) regarding appropriate content to include within the materials for the educational package. The key areas within the topic guides were: (i) knowledge about the HPV vaccine; (ii) views of existing communication materials; (iii) delivery of educational package, and; (iv) suggestions for content of materials (e.g. participants were asked to comment on their preferences of messaging in existing HPV vaccine communication materials in relation to ‘disease that HPV can cause’, ‘side-effects’, and ‘safety’). The topic guides are provided in Additional File 1.

Subsequently, a workshop plan was developed comprising activities where 11 young people across three youth organisations were asked to: (i) review existing communication materials identified through the content analysis; (ii) comment on their understanding of key HPV vaccine messages; (iii) make suggestions of their preferred messages, design, and language style (e.g. how to communicate risk of developing cancer), and; (iv) state their preferences for how the information should be delivered (e.g. in person by a healthcare professional, through media including animation). The workshop plan is provided in Additional File 2.

Interviews and workshops were digitally recorded and conducted by two researchers (HF & TC). These were facilitated through digital platforms because of public health guidance around the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic at the time. Research activities were undertaken one-to-one, or in pairs or small groups, to suit the needs and preferences of the participants. All participants were provided with a £20 gift voucher to say ‘Thank you’ for their time.

Recordings of interviews and workshops were transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were anonymised and double checked for accuracy against the audio file. Thematic analysis [19] was undertaken assisted by the Framework approach to data management [20] within QSR NVivo software. We used both an inductive and deductive approach to analyse the content, focusing on our main research questions while identifying key issues emerging from the data. Coding of all transcripts was undertaken by one researcher (HF), while a second researcher (TC) double-coded a sub-set of the transcripts (n = 6) to check for meaning, relevance, and reliability.

Consensus meetings (HF, TC) were undertaken to review, refine, and confirm the main themes and codes relevant to the developing content for the educational package. As the process of coding progressed and data were extracted, key terms and phrases were retained while repetition and extraneous text were removed (HF).

Intervention planning methodology: guiding principles

In the ‘person-based approach’, the guiding principles comprise a design objective and intervention features that address the user/context-specific behavioural need, issue or challenge identified in the earlier planning stages. Provisional guiding principles were iteratively developed by the research team and refined as further understanding was gained throughout the study.

Intervention planning methodology: behavioural analysis

The behavioural analysis aimed to identify behaviours to be targeted by the EDUCATE package and their potential barriers and facilitators. These behaviours related to HPV vaccine uptake identified through the ‘collating and analysing evidence’ phase of intervention planning (See Table 1) to be targeted by the EDUCATE package and their potential barriers and facilitators. The Behaviour Change Wheel was selected as it was designed to help researchers link behaviours to inform intervention design. Identified behaviours were mapped onto constructs from the Behaviour Change Wheel [21] to clearly describe the intervention processes and components, including behavioural domains, intervention functions, and the Behaviour Change Techniques [22] to be targeted.

Table 1 Evidence for key behavioural determinants that the EDUCATE package is trying to address

Intervention planning methodology: logic model

In line with the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research 2021 framework for the development of complex intervention [12], a logic model was developed to provide a visual representation of the proposed mechanisms of change for the EDUCATE package. This brought together the findings from the intervention planning activities and how these are anticipated to improve uptake of the HPV vaccination programme.

Co-production of the EDUCATE resources

The next stage of the research involved co-producing the content and format of the resources being developed. Initially, researchers (HF & TC) developed preliminary written plans outlining the content and suggested structure of the educational package, which was anticipated to comprise a PowerPoint presentation integrated with short films and Question-and-Answer breaks.

The content for the films was created by young people aged 12 to 15 years (n = 16), an HPV-cancer survivor, an immunisation nurse, and the creative team at Eight Creative Agency, at Knowle West Media Centre in Bristol (, who are experienced in working with young people to create health-related media materials.

This involved, three in-person filming shoots were organised across the research sites at a secondary school, a youth organisation, and an HPV-related charity. Animations were subsequently developed to include content not captured through the filming shoots. Music demos to accompany the films and animations were produced by young people enrolled on the Future Creative Leaders scheme hosted by Knowle West Media Centre. Young people were asked to provide in-person feedback on an initial story board developed by an animator and select the music to accompany each film.

A short, written training manual was produced by the study researchers (HF, TC) which contained key information, frequently asked questions. and advice as to how the package can be delivered in a way that creates a safe space for young people to ask questions (e.g. privately through a question box). Key informants (members of an immunisation team, a secondary school teacher, and professional within immunisation operations for the national programme) reviewed and commented in writing on the scripts for the videos and content of the PowerPoint presentation. This ensured the content was accurate, evidence-based, and consistent with best clinical and educational practice.

Refinement of the EDUCATE resources

The EDUCATE package was provided to young people through a pre-recorded session delivered during tutor time in a secondary school (Bristol) and a session delivered in a youth organisation (Southwark, London). Young people (n = 17) participated in small group interviews to provide their feedback. Topic guides were developed to elicit their perceptions of the positive and negative aspects of the educational package, including how it was delivered, the design, and suggesting or creating new content. The topic guides are provided in Additional File 1.

Further feedback on the content of the educational package was obtained through a series of workshops organised with key informants (n = 15) (members of immunisation teams in both the study sites, representative from the World Health Organisation), in addition to the co-authors of this manuscript.

Responses from all participants were collated in a Table of Changes document. The researchers (HF, TC, JK) held on-line meetings to agree on modifications to the educational resources in line with the ‘person-based approach’ common guiding principles [17] and the guiding principles developed specifically for the EDUCATE package. This involved considering whether they were likely to impact on behaviour change or a precursor to behaviour change (e.g. acceptability, feasibility, persuasiveness, motivation, engagement). Prioritisation for changes were based on the MoSCoW (Must have, Should have, Could have, Would like) criteria [23]


Intervention planning and development activities

An overview of the results from the intervention planning and development activities are provided below.

Intervention planning: collating and analysing evidence

Literature review

The literature review identified the key behavioural determinants for young people that contribute to inequalities in uptake of the English HPV vaccination programme. These include low levels of understanding about the HPV vaccine among some young people, fear of receiving the vaccine, and lack of autonomy by young people in decision-making and consent procedures (Table 1).

Patient and public involvement

During advisory group discussions, young people reflected on their own information needs having been offered the vaccine in the school-setting. There was consensus that videos were an appealing way to communicate health-related information. There was no clear preference for who should deliver the educational package, as both teachers and healthcare professionals were valued.

Acceptability of the initial prototype was ascertained following preliminary feedback from young people who attended sessions where it was delivered. Young people’s questions during the session related both to the HPV vaccine and preparation for vaccination. Some young people appeared reassured that the immunisation nurse delivering the information session would be present at their upcoming vaccination session, and requested that they would personally administer the vaccination. At the request of one of the schools, the information session was delivered separately by gender. This appeared to allow young men to ask different questions specifically about HPV-related cancers affecting men.

Content analysis of existing communication materials

Overall, the communication materials identified encompassed varied formats and content, reflective of different HPV vaccination programmes and the priorities of the organisations responsible for producing the materials. For example, some communication materials presented information related to safety and side-effects in terms of how many people were anticipated to have the side-effects, whereas others only provided confirmation relating to safety or minimal side-effects with no explanatory information. Few communication materials addressed sexuality as a risk factor for HPV-related disease. We report further details of the findings elsewhere, in addition to how these were used to inform the subsequent stages of the research [18].

Preliminary interviews and workshops: Content and delivery of the educational package

Analysis of the data focussed on key issues relevant to intervention development. These were ‘delivery’ (support, gender, addressing training needs, and role of professionals) and ‘key content to be communicated’ (risk of developing cancer, safety and side-effects, sexuality and behaviours). A summary of the findings, and illustrative quotations that were expressed concisely and typify responses relating to the themes, are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Key themes from preliminary interviews and workshops

Intervention planning: guiding principles

In brief, the EDUCATE package aims to: (i) improve young people’s knowledge and understanding about the HPV vaccine; (ii) increase young people’s confidence to have a vaccine in the school setting; (iii) engage young people in the decision-making and the consent process, and; (iv) be delivered flexibly to meet the needs of the target population (Table 3).

Table 3 Guiding principles for the EDUCATE package —an intervention to improve HPV vaccine uptake

Intervention planning: behavioural analysis

The proposed EDUCATE package employs four intervention functions (enablement, education, persuasion, and environmental restructuring) which are enacted by six behavioural change techniques (‘instruction on how to perform a behaviour’, ‘information about health consequences’, ‘anticipated regrets’, ‘generalisation of target behaviour’, ‘pros and cons’, and ‘restructuring the social environment’) (Table 4).

Table 4 Behavioural analysis of EDUCATE intervention using the Behaviour Change Wheel and the Behaviour Change Technique taxonomy

Intervention planning: logic model

The logic model for the EDUCATE is provided in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Logic model for EDUCATE

Co-production of the EDUCATE resources

Building on our findings from the interview and workshop data with young people and key informants, and the wider literature, the following key themes for content were selected: (i) HPV-related information; (ii) how vaccines work; (iii) safety and side-effects of vaccination; (iv) eligibility for the HPV vaccination programme, and; (v) preparation of young people to receive the HPV vaccine [18]. Signposting young people to other information sources, such as websites or professionals involved in the delivery of the programme, was also valued.

Film shoots were organised around the following scenarios confirmed by young people: (i) interview with young people post-vaccination around their experience of having the vaccine at school; (ii) unvaccinated young people interviewing vaccinated (older) young people; (iii) young people interviewing healthcare professionals to find out key information; (iv) a vaccination session taking place, and; (v) a case study with a person who has experienced HPV-related cancer. Building on feedback from young people expressing the importance of feeling represented in the materials, participants were ethnically diverse and filming took part in different settings (e.g. schools, youth clubs).

An initial script and story board for an animation was developed to capture content not captured through the filming shoots (‘HPV-related information’ and ‘how vaccines work’). Feedback from young people resulted in changes related to communicating messages around: the sexual transmissibility of HPV; ensuring imagery of young people were ethnically diverse, and; avoiding assumptions around HPV infection risk only affecting heterosexual partnerships.

There is a wide range of maturity, knowledge and experience in relation to young people’s sexual development aged 12–13 years. For example, some of the target population may already be aware of their own sexuality or sexual preferences, or be sexually active. Other young people may become interested in relationships and sex at an older age. There was consensus from young people and key informants that it was important to be honest and not withhold information related to sexual behaviours from young people as part of this educational resource. Therefore, content related to key issues regarding sexual behaviours and sexuality in relation to the HPV vaccine have been included (e.g. higher risk of developing HPV-related cancers among men who have sex with men). However, the content was deliberately kept brief or included only withing the training manual so young people would not be overloaded with information if they are not emotionally ready for it.

To ensure applicability to wider population groups with different cultural values or belief systems, the EDUCATE resources were developed as a universal package that primarily focuses on ‘health prevention’ rather than focussing on ‘sex education’. The content related to the sexual transmission of HPV is minimal. Further, the resources were not translated into additional languages as they have been designed to be delivered in settings (e.g. English schools) where sessions are delivered in English.

Refinement of the EDUCATE resources

The resources for the EDUCATE package are PowerPoint slides, interspersed with five short films. A guidance document with additional information for the delivery of the session was also produced. We intend to make the final product available in the public domain shortly.

The creative team selected a colour palate and font that was intended to be appealing to young people. Overall, young people and key informants were positive about the materials and felt they would be beneficial in helping young people find out about the HPV vaccine.

The changes enacted upon were mostly minor alterations to the content of the PowerPoint slides, such as changing words to improve clarity of meaning. In some cases, further content was added to the guidance document to balance providing additional information within the PowerPoint with overloading information at the risk of disengaging young people (e.g. availability of HPV vaccine for men-who-have-sex-with-men in sexual health and HIV clinics). Additional notes to assist delivery of the package were added to the PowerPoint slides. Design changes included the redesign of existing diagrams to match the overall style and ensuring gender balance of figures on the PowerPoint slides. The length of one of the films was also reduced to ensure the information was succinct.


This manuscript reports the systematic theory, evidence, and person-based approach [17] we used to co-produce the EDUCATE package. The resources comprise a training manual and PowerPoint presentation, interspersed with five short films. The EDUCATE package is intended to be used alongside, and complement, materials developed for the national HPV vaccination programme. Finally, it has been specifically designed to address information needs of young people less likely to be vaccinated.

We collaborated with young people, and key informants (including school staff, immunisation teams, public health staff, and multi-disciplinary academics) at all stages of the research to iteratively optimise the content and design of the intervention to increase acceptability to the target user groups. The Behaviour Change Wheel [21] was used to underpin the EDUCATE package theoretically and to identify the target Behaviour Change Techniques [22].

Within healthcare research, there has been an increase in recent years of the use of co-production methodologies, that involve sharing decision-making and including the expertise of the target users delivering and receiving an intervention [15]. Examples of co-production studies involving young people include informing the redesign of an educational psychology service [24] and the design of a social media suicide prevention campaign [25]. However, we are unaware of any interventions to address adolescent vaccination uptake and inequalities that have been developed using the principles of co-production. The EDUCATE package therefore addresses this evidence gap.

As part of this study, we enjoyed working closely with young people from disadvantaged backgrounds who are often under-represented in research. Ensuring their voices were heard throughout this study was further challenged by the on-going COVID-19 pandemic, which included at times closures of youth organisations and the necessary reliance on digital platforms to conduct research among a population group with limited access. However, we were able to overcome these barriers through the perseverance and willingness of professionals to facilitate the research activities and young people to be involved.

Despite the increased popularity of using co-production methodologies to develop interventions, the effectiveness on long-term changes in population health behaviours are currently uncertain [26]. To address this research gap, we plan a future implementation study to further test the mechanisms of delivery (e.g. engage young people in the decision-making and the consent process) and gather evidence in relation to changes to uptake of the HPV vaccination programme.


We were unable to conduct further planned piloting of the EDUCATE package, because of COVID-19 restrictions requiring young people at a second youth organisation to self-isolate. There were also time constraints caused by further engagement activities taking longer to organise because of extra demands on school staff and immunisation teams caused by responding to changing demands of the pandemic response. Further, the views expressed by contributors may not be generalisable to other groups of young people less likely to receive the HPV vaccine. For example, young people with Special Educational Needs or Disability were not represented. Information related to the ethnic or socioeconomic background of young people who participated in the study was not collected. The role of parents, and their information needs, were not considered as part of this study.


This study has begun to address the need for a rigorously developed, theory-based intervention to meet young people’s information needs about the HPV vaccination programme. By working closely with young people and key informants, the content of the communication materials was developed to meet the needs of target users. Future studies to examine how the EDUCATE package is implemented in practice and the impact on uptake of the HPV vaccination programme are underway.

Availability of data and materials

It is the authors’ intention to share their underpinning research data in order to maximise reuse and evidence their findings. When participants consent or assent to take part in the study, their permission to deposit anonymised transcripts at the University of Bristol Research Data Repository ( was sought. A metadata record will be published openly by the repository and this record will clearly state how data can be accessed by bona fide researchers. Requests for access will be directed to the Research Data team at Bristol, who will assess the motives of potential data re-users before granting access to the data. No authentic request for access will be refused and re-users will not be charged for any part of this process.



Coronavirus disease


Human papillomavirus


Must have, should have, could have, would like


Young Person’s Advisory Group


  1. Brianti P, De Flammineis E, Mercuri S. Review of HPV-related diseases and cancers. J New Microbiol. 2017;40(2):80–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). Statement on HPV Vaccination, 2008. 2008.

  3. Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), 2018.

  4. Kesten J, et al. Mixed-methods study in England and Northern Ireland to understand young men who have sex with men’s knowledge and attitudes towards human papillomavirus vaccination. BMJ Open. 2019;9: e025070.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Fisher H, et al. Secondary analyses to test the impact on inequalities and uptake of the schools-based human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme by stage of implementation of a new consent policy in the south-west of England. BMJ open. 2021;11(7):e044980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher H, et al. Examining inequalities in the uptake of the school-based HPV vaccination programme in England: a retrospective cohort study. J Public Health. 2013;36(1):36–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fisher, H., et al., Young women’s autonomy and information needs in the schools-based HPV vaccination programme: A qualitative study. BMC Public Health, 2020. 20(1680).

  8. Batista Ferrer H, et al. Barriers and facilitators to uptake of the school-based HPV vaccination programme in an ethnically diverse group of young women. J Public Health. 2016;38(3):569–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Grandahl M, et al. School-based intervention for the prevention of HPV among adolescents: a cluster randomised controlled study. BMJ Open. 2016;6(1):e009875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Costantino C, et al. Human papilloma virus infection and vaccination: pre-post intervention analysis on knowledge, attitudes and willingness to vaccinate among preadolescents attending secondary schools of palermo, sicily. Int J Environ Public Health Res. 2020;17(15):5362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Skinner S, et al. LB11 Randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention to improve school-based hpv. vaccination for adolescents: the hpv. edu study. Sex Trans Infect. 2015;91(2):A77.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Skivington K, et al, A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance. British Medical Journal, 2021. 374.

  13. Michie S, Atkins L, Gainforth H, Novas competências: contributos atuais da psicologia. Braga: Axioma-Publicações da Faculdade de Filosofia, Changing behaviour to improve clinical practice and policy. 2016: p. 41–60.

  14. Hoddinott P. A new era for intervention development studies. Pilot Feasib Stud. 2015;1(1):36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Voorberg W, Bekkers V, Tummers L. A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Manag Rev. 2015;17(9):1333–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fisher H, et al. Co-production of an educational package for the universal HPV vaccination programme tailored for schools with low uptake: A participatory study protocol. BMJ Open. 2020;10:e039029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Yardley L, et al. The person-based approach to intervention development: application to digital health-related behavior change interventions. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(1):e30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fisher H, et al. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine communication tools for young people: a content analysis. Health Education Journal: Accepted/In press; 2022.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ritchie, J., et al., Analysing qualitative data. 1994.

  21. Michie S, van Stralen M, West R. The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci. 2011;6(1):42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Michie S, et al. From theory to intervention: mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behaviour change techniques. Appl Psychol. 2008;57(4):660–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Bradbury, K., et al., Developing digital interventions: a methodological guide. Evid-Based Complement Altern Med, 2014. 2014.

  24. Boswell N, et al. Listening to children and young people: an educational psychology service co-production journey. Educ Psychol Pract. 2021;37(4):396–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Thorn P, et al. Developing a suicide prevention social media campaign with young people (The# Chatsafe project): co-design approach. JMIR Mental Health. 2020;7(5):e17520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Reed H, et al. Co-production as an emerging methodology for developing school-based health interventions with students aged 11–16: systematic review of intervention types, theories and processes and thematic synthesis of stakeholders’ experiences. Prev Sci. 2021;22(4):475–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


HF and SA acknowledge support from the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol. The Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol is part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and a partnership between University of Bristol and UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), in collaboration with the MRC Biostatistics Unit at University of Cambridge and University of the West of England. This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit in Vaccines and Immunisation (NIHR200929), a partnership between UK Health Security Agency and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR, UK Health Security Agency or the Department of Health and Social Care. JK and CT are partly funded by National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West) and NIHR HPRU BSE.


This work is supported by the Medical Research Council (MRC) Public Health Intervention Development scheme (Project Number: MR/T027150/1).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



HF was responsible for co-ordinating the study, data collection, and led data analysis. HF wrote the first draft. TC assisted with study coordination, data collection and analysis. JK conducted one group discussion with young people as part of the refinement of the intervention stage and assisted with the Table of Changes process. HF, TC, SA, AF, MH, JY, SM-J, CT & LL were involved in the conception and design of the research. All authors (HF, TC, SA, AF, MH, JY, SM-J, CT, JK, KW & LL) contributed to the final version of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harriet Fisher.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The University of Bristol’s Faculty of Health Sciences, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine’s Research Ethics Committees and the National Health Service Health Research Authority provided approvals for the study (references 99102, 21887 & 279670 respectively). For participants aged 16 years and over, informed written or verbal consent was obtained prior to participating in a research activity. Where participants were aged below 16 years, parental consent in addition to adolescent assent was obtained, either written or verbally.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare there are no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: 

Topic guides.

Additional file 2: 

Workshop plan.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fisher, H., Chantler, T., Finn, A. et al. Development of an educational package for the universal human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme: a co-production study with young people and key informants. Res Involv Engagem 8, 16 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: