MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076082783 · doi:10.1188/07.onf.1203-1209

Cervical Cancer Beliefs and Pap Test Screening Practices Among Chinese American Immigrants

2007· article· en· W2076082783 on OpenAlexaff
Frances Lee‐Lin, Marjorie A. Pett, Usha Menon, Sharon Lee, Lillian M. Nail, Kathi Mooney, Joanne Itano

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology nursing forum · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicinePap testTest (biology)Cervical cancerFamily medicineHealth careOddsImmigrationPsychological interventionCancer screeningEthnic groupPopulationMarital statusCancerGerontologyCervical cancer screeningNursingLogistic regressionEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To examine beliefs and Pap test utilization among Chinese American women, the largest Asian female population in the United States. RESEARCH APPROACH: Cross-sectional descriptive, correlational study. SETTING: Metropolitan areas of Portland, OR. PARTICIPANTS: 100 foreign-born Chinese women aged 40 years and older. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: Three questionnaires were modified, translated, combined, and pretested. Participants completed the self-administered questionnaire in a group setting. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Utilization of Pap test screening, health beliefs, and cultural and sociodemographic variables. FINDINGS: Sixty-eight percent reported having a Pap test within the prior three years (adherence), and 84% reported ever having a Pap test. The odds of Pap test use and adherence decreased with increasing age. Women with insurance or a regular healthcare provider had better odds of Pap test use and adherence. Older age, older age when a participant moved to the United States, and increased modesty were negatively associated with ever having had a Pap test. CONCLUSIONS: Age and cultural beliefs influence Pap test use and adherence. The strength of provider recommendation and healthcare access as predictors suggest areas for interventions designed to increase screening for cervical cancer. INTERPRETATION: Nurses play a vital role in preventive health care, especially with the growing number of advanced practice nurses delivering primary care. Primary healthcare providers should be reminded of their influential role in increasing adherence to cancer screening. Further health policy action is necessary to extend screening coverage to those who do not have adequate health insurance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.383 · 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

Citations77
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology nursing forumSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207