Accessing cancer services in North West England: the Chinese population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relatively few Chinese patients access tertiary cancer services in North West England. We investigated the reasons behind this using a culturally sensitive questionnaire. The questionnaire, completed by 214 Chinese people in English, Cantonese or Mandarin, evaluated the Chinese population's access and satisfaction with primary care, understanding of cancer and awareness of local cancer services. Ninety-five per cent of respondents were registered with a general practitioner (GP) and 75% had accessed primary care in the last year. Satisfaction with GP consultations was high but a third of respondents reported a lack of confidence in local National Health Service (NHS) services. Only 57% of eligible women had attended cervical screening programmes. The overall understanding of the causes and treatment of cancer and cancer services in the North West was poor. Despite registration with primary healthcare, the Chinese population under-utilise cancer prevention programmes and tertiary cancer services because of a lack of awareness and understanding of cancer services in the North West. A significant proportion of the population is dissatisfied with the perceived slow service and lack confidence in services, with 41% considering using healthcare abroad. These data highlight the critical need to engage with, educate and support the Chinese population if they are to access NHS cancer services.
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) | 0.000 | 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".