Table 3.

Attitudes towards HPV infection, vaccine and cervical cancer among GPs and public health nurses in Northern Norway: Proportion (%) agreeing with the following statements (95% CI).^a

	GPs (n = 121) %	Public healthnurses (n = 99) %	pb
I am very concerned about possible side effects in the long termd	13 (7–19)	9 (3–15)	0.337
I am very unsure about whether the vaccine is effective enough against cancerd	21 (14–28)	17 (10–24)	0.512
I am worried that the vaccine may make the screening programme less populard	22 (15–29)	14 (7–21)	0.160
I am concerned because there is much disagreement among experts about the vaccined	24 (16–32)	15 (8–22)	0.104
I do not believe the effect of the vaccine lasts long enough	9 (4–14)	6 (1–11)	0.402
The vaccine is important to prevent women needing operations to avoid cervical cancer	58 (49–67)	72 (63–81)	0.033
I do not think HPV or cervical cancer is such a big problem that we need the HPV vaccine	11 (5–17)	6 (1–11)	0.219
The vaccine is important to prevent the development of cervical cancer	79 (72–86)	96 (92–100)	<0.000
The screening programme for cervical cancer is so good that the HPV vaccine is unnecessary	12 (6–18)	2 (0–5)	0.008c
Cervical cancer is a public health problem	40 (31–49)	56 (46–66)	0.019
Precancerous lesions is a public health problem	50 (41–59)	67 (58–76)	0.015
The vaccine is important for preventing genital warts	31 (23–39)	75 (66–84)	<0.000

^aOne year after the inclusion of the HPV vaccine in the childhood vaccination programme.

^bSignificant differences between GPs and PHN in bold, p value based on Chi square test and.

^cFisher’s Exact Test.

^dUsed as independent variables in logistic regression model(s).