Awareness of Risk Factors among Persons at Risk for Lung Cancer, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Sleep Apnea: A Canadian Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess awareness among persons at risk for lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and sleep apnea regarding symptoms and risk factors of the disease, and their attitudes regarding the disease and toward those who are affected. METHODS: A quantitative hybrid telephone and Internet survey of a representative population of Canadian adults at risk for at least one of the three diseases was conducted. To measure the awareness and attitudes of First Nations, Inuit and Métis people to these diseases, a proportionate number were also surveyed. RESULTS: A total of 3626 individuals were contacted. Of these, 3036 (84%) were eligible to participate. Of those at risk for lung cancer and COPD, 65% and 69%, respectively, were due to tobacco smoke exposure. Among those at risk, 72% believed that they were informed about lung cancer compared with 36% for COPD and 56% for sleep apnea. Most respondents were knowledgeable about the common symptoms of lung cancer, COPD and sleep apnea, but were less aware of the impact lifestyle choices could have on the development of these disorders and the availability of treatment. Most of the participants (77%) believed that smoking was an addiction rather than a habit (19%). There were no significant differences in the awareness of risk factors, symptoms and attitudes toward all three lung diseases between First Nations, Inuit and Métis people and the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Canadians are reasonably aware of risk factors and symptoms for lung cancer and sleep apnea. However, there is poor awareness of COPD as a disease entity. There is a lack of appreciation for the impact lifestyle choices and changes can have on lung diseases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".