MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141257749 · doi:10.7314/apjcp.2013.14.12.7143

The Decision-Making Journey of Malaysian Women with Early Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study

2013· article· en· W2141257749 on OpenAlex
Adina Abdullah, Khatijah Lim Abdullah, Cheng Har Yip, Soo‐Hwang Teo, Nur Aishah Mohd Taib, Chirk Jenn Ng

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerThematic analysisQualitative researchNonprobability samplingMedicineDeliberationFamily medicineDecision-makingBreast cancer awarenessCancerGynecologyPsychologyPopulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The survival outcomes for women presenting with early breast cancer are influenced by treatment decisions. In Malaysia, survival outcome is generally poor due to late presentation. Of those who present early, many refuse treatment for complementary therapy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the decision making experiences of women with early breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative study using individual in-depth interviews was conducted to capture the decision making process of women with early breast cancer in Malaysia. We used purposive sampling to recruit women yet to undergo surgical treatment. A total of eight participants consented and were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. These women were recruited from a period of one week after they were informed of their diagnoses. A topic guide, based on the Ottawa decision support framework (ODSF), was used to facilitate the interviews, which were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: We identified four phases in the decision-making process of women with early breast cancer: discovery (pre-diagnosis); confirmatory ('receiving bad news'); deliberation; and decision (making a decision). These phases ranged from when women first discovered abnormalities in their breasts to them making final surgical treatment decisions. Information was vital in guiding these women. Support from family members, friends, healthcare professionals as well as survivors also has an influencing role. However, the final say on treatment decision was from themselves. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment decision for women with early breast cancer in Malaysia is a result of information they gather on their decision making journey. This journey starts with diagnosis. The women's spouses, friends, family members and healthcare professionals play different roles as information providers and supporters at different stages of treatment decisions. However, the final treatment decision is influenced mainly by women's own experiences, knowledge and understanding.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.355 · 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