05). We therefore set a target of recruiting 2000 participants over two cohorts. Female adolescents in UK school Year 11 (age 15–16 years) were recruited from 13 state-funded schools across London, England in September 2011. In 2008/9 these girls were in the first cohort to be offered the bivalent HPV vaccine at school in Year 8. A sampling

frame was used to randomly select state-funded schools that varied in terms of SES and HPV vaccine uptake. Only schools that achieved vaccine uptake levels within ±10% of the national average in 2008/9 (80%) [30] were included (n = 89), to eliminate schools where uptake might be unusually high or low for idiosyncratic reasons INCB018424 ic50 related to delivery rather than the individual characteristics that

were the focus of this study. Schools were classified as having achieved uptake rates above or below the national average. School-level SES was measured using General Certificate in Secondary Education (GCSE) attainment and Free School Meal Eligibility (children are eligible for free school meals if their parents R428 concentration are entitled to means-tested welfare benefits from the UK government [31]). Schools were classified as being above or below the national average on each of these measures [32] and [33]. Schools were randomly selected from each cell of the sampling frame and contacted via email and telephone until we reached an estimated target sample of 1000 participants, based on school roll numbers. Further details about the sampling frame have been reported elsewhere [34]. All 89 schools were sent details of the study; 13 schools agreed to participate, 19 refused due to scheduling difficulties and 57 did not respond to our initial contact and were not re-contacted because the target sample had been achieved. One year later, in September 2012, female adolescents in school Year 11 were 17-DMAG (Alvespimycin) HCl recruited from 12 of the original 13 schools; one school withdrew from the study because of scheduling difficulties. These girls were in the second cohort offered the routine HPV

vaccine at school (in 2009/10). Identical materials and methods were used during the two waves of data collection. Parents received an information sheet about the study and an opt-out form 1 week before the research took place. Parental consent was implied if the opt-out form was not returned to the school. All girls in attendance were given an information sheet and a questionnaire booklet. Consent was implied upon completion of the questionnaire and all girls were debriefed with an information sheet containing information about HPV. The study was approved by UCL research ethics committee (ref: 0630/002). Participants were asked to report their age, ethnicity, religion and, if they reported a religious affiliation, to say whether they practised their religion.