Evaluation of a Cervical Cancer Control Intervention Using Lay Health Workers for Vietnamese American Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We conducted a trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a cervical cancer control intervention for Vietnamese American women that used lay health workers. METHODS: The study group included 234 women who had not received a Papanicolaou (Pap) test in the last 3 years. Experimental group participants received a lay health worker home visit. Our trial endpoint was Pap test receipt within 6 months of randomization. Pap testing completion was ascertained through women's self-reports and medical record reviews. We examined intervention effects among women who had ever received a Pap test (prior to randomization) and women who had never received a Pap test. RESULTS: Three quarters of the women in the experimental group completed a home visit. Ever-screened experimental group women were significantly more likely to report Pap testing (P < .02) and to have records verifying Pap testing (P < .04) than were ever-screened control group women. There were no significant differences between the trial arms for women who had never been screened. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that lay health worker-based interventions for Vietnamese American women are feasible to implement and can increase levels of Pap testing use among ever-screened women but not among never-screened women.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".