Table 5.

Communication, peer norm, and risk-based indicators for the latent class model of practitioner HPV vaccine recommendation profiles.

Indicators	Response Options
COMMUNICATION
Recommendation Strength	0 = includes (a) would not mention (b) would recommend waiting (c) would recommend but not push 1 = I would strongly recommend HPV vaccination
Timeliness	0 = Vaccinate at a future encounter 1 = Vaccinate today
Recommend all 3 adolescent vaccines same time	0 = no 1 = I would normalize HPV vaccination (e.g., by offering and recommending it at the same time as the other required adolescent vaccines Tdap and MCV4
Emphasize cancer protection	0 = no 1 = I would emphasize the importance of the HPV vaccine including discussing the cancers and diseases that it protects against
Emphasize genital wart protection	0 = no 1 = I would mention the vaccine protects against genital warts
Emphasize strong antibody response when vaccinating at younger age	0 = no 1 = I would mention that vaccinating at a younger age results in a stronger antibody response
Use positive tone when recommending HPV vaccine	0 = no 1 = I would talk with the parent in an enthusiastic and hopeful tone mentioning that it’s exciting to have a vaccine that protects against cancer
PEER NORMS
Peer Descriptive Norms “peer practitioner HPV vaccine recommendation practices”	0 = includes (a) Most of the practitioners in our clinic would not mention/discuss the HPVvaccine; (b) Most of the practitioners in our clinic would not recommend HPV vaccinationroutinely; (c) Most of the practitioners in our clinic would recommend the HPV vaccine, butbe neutral/noncommittal 1 = Most of the practitioners in our clinic would strongly recommend HPV vaccination
Peer Injunctive Norms “peer practitioner HPV vaccine recommendation views”	0 = includes (a) Unimportant; (b) Not essential nor unessential for good health; (c) Important but not essential (for good health) 1 = includes (a) Absolutely essential (for good health) and (b) Essential for continuing to be seen as a patient in the practice
RISK BASED APPROACH
Using clinical judgment about whether patient will become sexually active in the next 2 years to adjust HPV vaccine recommendation	0 = Unlikely or very unlikely to adjust HPV vaccine recommendation based on judgment about whether child will become sexually active in next two years 1 = Very likely or likely to adjust HPV vaccine recommendation based on judgment about whether child will become sexually active in next two years