Cervical cancer awareness and preventive behaviour among female university students in South Africa.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this descriptive cross-sectional study were to assess the awareness about cervical cancer and preventive behaviour of female first year Mangosuthu University of Technology students. METHODS: A total of 205 students were selected by stratified random sampling techniques. RESULTS: 40% of the students were currently sexually active and among them 28% reported having two or more sexual partners. A third (33%) of the participants heard about cervical cancer. Among them a third (32%) and over a quarter (26%) knew about the HPV virus and multiple sexual partners, respectively, as risk factors for cervical cancer. Participants were twice more likely to use condoms if they heard about cervical cancer (OR = 2.47, p = 0.003). Only 31% participants had heard about the Pap smear test, and among them a third (33%) knew that Pap smear is used for detection or prevention of cervical cancer. CONCLUSION: University management should concentrate on developing policies on health education and promotion particularly targeting preventable health conditions to prevent transmission of the HPV virus.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".