Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To assess young women's breast health knowledge and explore its relation to the use of screening mammography. Methods A convenience sample of 180 women aged 25-45 residing in Toronto, Canada, with no history of breast cancer and mammography received an information brochure and four questionnaires which assessed their knowledge of breast health, sociodemographic/clinical character istics, and intended decision to use screening mammography. Results Women's overall baseline knowledge score ranged from 0-18 with a mean of 10 and SD of 3.9. About half of the participants had a low score (0-9), 31 per cent did not know that the risk of breast cancer increases with age, 43 per cent did not know what was the appropriate age to start breast self examination (BSE), and 48 per cent did not know how frequently BSE should be performed. The overall knowledge score was significantly higher for those women who intended to use screening than those who did not (10.8 vs. 8.4, p<0.001). The intended use of screening was associated with women's knowledge ( p<0.001), self-perceived health ( p=0.02), perceived susceptibility to breast cancer ( p=0.04) and perceived usefulness of information ( p=0.001). Conclusion The study demonstrates that breast health knowledge is limited even among highly educated young women. This finding suggests the need for providing breast health education to women at earlier stage in their life when they have ample time to go through a logical series of decision stages on their way to adopting a new behaviour.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it