MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053233266 · doi:10.1177/1359105311431173

Risky business: Risk information and the moderating effect of message frame and past behaviour on women’s perceptions of the Human Papillomavirus vaccine

2011· article· en· W2053233266 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather L. Gainforth, Amy E. Latimer‐Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHuman papillomavirus vaccineRisk perceptionCoping (psychology)Human papillomavirusPerceptionFraming (construction)Social psychologyPsychologyCognitive appraisalMedicineClinical psychologyCervical cancerGardasil

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of response cost information, message framing and past behaviour on women's coping appraisal and motivation to be vaccinated against the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) were investigated using a 2 Frame × 2 Response Cost × 2 Pap Status design. Women (N = 286) read one of four messages about the vaccine. Women who received high-risk information perceived the vaccine as having higher response cost and were less motivated to be vaccinated compared to women who received low-risk information. The deleterious effects of risk information on specific aspects of women's coping appraisal may be mitigated by appropriately framed messages.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health PsychologySame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207