Recent Pap Tests among Canadian Women: Is Depression a Barrier to Cervical Cancer Screening?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that depression is associated with both lower use of preventive cancer screening programs and lower probability of cancer survival. Given the increasing incidence of depression among Canadian women, this study sought to determine if recent Pap testing varies by the presence of depression. METHODS: This population-based study used cross-sectional, self-reported data from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) Cycle 3.1 (2005) to estimate the association between depression and recent Pap testing within the previous 3 years among 2351 Canadian women without hysterectomy aged 18-69 years. RESULTS: After adjustment for confounders, depressed women had nonsignificantly increased odds of a recent Pap test (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95, 1.29); however, age was an important effect modifier of this relationship. Young depressed women (18-29 and 30-39 years) were significantly more likely to report a recent Pap test (AOR 1.78, 95% CI 1.37, 2.31, and AOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.00, 2.15, respectively), whereas middle-aged depressed women (40-49 and 50-59 years) were significantly less likely to report a recent Pap test (AOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.58, 0.98, and AOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50, 0.93, respectively) compared with their nondepressed counterparts. No significant relationship was detected for the oldest age group (60-69 years). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, these results are the first to demonstrate an interaction effect of age on the association between depression and recent Pap testing. Longitudinal studies should be conducted to explore the role of age as an effect modifier of this relationship and to inform policy and programming aimed at improving rates of cervical cancer screening across all age groups.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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".