MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131529413 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-004783

Understanding the role of embarrassment in gynaecological screening: a qualitative study from the ASPIRE cervical cancer screening project in Uganda

2014· article· en· W2131529413 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlSimon Fraser UniversityWomen's Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmbarrassmentCervical cancerQualitative researchCervical cancer screeningReproductive medicineGynaecological cancerFamily medicineCervical screeningGynecologyCancerInternal medicinePregnancySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To define embarrassment and develop an understanding of the role of embarrassment in relation to cervical cancer screening and self-collected human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing in Uganda. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, qualitative study using semistructured one-to-one interviews and focus groups. PARTICIPANTS: 6 key-informant health workers and 16 local women, purposively sampled. Key informant inclusion criteria: Ugandan members of the project team. Focus group inclusion criteria: woman age 30-69 years, Luganda or Swahili speaking, living or working in the target Ugandan community. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: unwillingness to sign informed consent. SETTING: Primary and tertiary low-resource setting in Kampala, Uganda. RESULTS: In Luganda, embarrassment relating to cervical cancer is described in two forms. 'Community embarrassment' describes discomfort based on how a person may be perceived by others. 'Personal embarrassment' relates to shyness or discomfort with her own genitalia. Community embarrassment was described in themes relating to place of study recruitment, amount of privacy in dwellings, personal relationship with health workers, handling of the vaginal swab and misunderstanding of HPV self-collection as HIV testing. Themes of personal embarrassment related to lack of knowledge, age and novelty of the self-collection swab. Overall, embarrassment was a barrier to screening at the outset and diminished over time through education and knowledge. Fatalism regarding cervical cancer diagnosis, worry about results and stigma associated with a cervical cancer diagnosis were other psychosocial barriers described. Overcoming psychosocial barriers to screening can include peer-to-peer education, drama and media campaigns. CONCLUSIONS: Embarrassment and other psychosocial barriers may play a large role at the onset of a screening programme, but over time as education and knowledge increase, and the social norms around screening evolve, its role diminishes. The role of peer-to-peer education and community authorities on healthcare cannot be overlooked and can have a major impact in overcoming psychosocial and social barriers to screening.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.329
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.163 · 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