MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160890865 · doi:10.1038/pcan.2009.30

Awareness of prostate cancer among patients and the general public: results of an international survey

2009· article· en· W2160890865 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. M. Fitzpatrick, Roger Kirby, Caroline Brough, A L Saggerson

Bibliographic record

VenueProstate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerFamily medicineSample (material)Public healthTelephone surveyDemographyGerontologyEnvironmental healthGynecologyCancerInternal medicinePathologyAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to assess the level of awareness of prostate cancer (PCa) among the general public and PCa patients in Europe and North America. A survey was undertaken across four European countries (UK, Germany, Italy and Spain), and across the United States and Canada in late 2007. In total, 1008 men with PCa and their partners (the 'prostate sample'), and 911 men without PCa and their partners (the 'well sample') participated in the survey, all aged > or =50 years. Interviews were conducted through telephone, pen and paper, and online. Many people surveyed (53%) thought that breast cancer is more common than PCa. Moreover, 1 in 10 people from the well sample (10%) thought that PCa affects both men and women. When the prostate sample was asked about their perceived level of risk of PCa before diagnosis, 50% believed that they/their husband or partner were previously at low or very low risk, before they were diagnosed. Awareness of the major risk factors for PCa (age and family history) was generally good, but respondents were less clear about the role of other potential factors, such as smoking and drinking alcohol. This international survey, thought to be largest of its type, shows that although patient and public awareness of PCa is generally satisfactory, there is still a considerable lack of clarity about PCa risk factors, and a danger for people to underestimate their own/their partner's perceived risk for PCa. Programmes to responsibly educate and inform men and their partners about risk factors, prevalence and screening tools for PCa are required.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProstate Cancer and Prostatic DiseasesSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207