MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Pap Test Screening Clinic in a South Asian Community of Vancouver, British Columbia: Challenges to Maintaining Utilization

2004· article· en· W2167976895 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sukhdev Grewal, Joan L. Bottorff, Lynda G. Balneaves

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Nursing · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsLangara College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Public healthMedicineGerontologyFamily medicineGeographyEnvironmental healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to describe experiences and challenges in establishing a South Asian Pap Test Clinic. The specialized Pap test clinic for immigrant South Asian women was a community-initiated response to high rates of cervical cancer within this population. Efforts were made to ensure that the clinic provided health services in a sensitive and culturally appropriate manner. Although women were generally positive about their experiences at the South Asian Pap Test Clinic and often encouraged other women to attend the clinic for Pap testing, attendance patterns have not been maintained. The three most significant challenges to the clinic's ongoing success were: (1) maintaining the continued involvement of stakeholders in developing long-term strategies to enhance community awareness about cervical cancer; (2) creating mechanisms to strengthen support from physicians in the community; and (3) meeting the needs of the underserved within a specialized health service for South Asian immigrant women. These challenges provide important lessons for others to increase the participation of immigrant women in screening practices. Nurses can play a key role in mobilizing and maintaining collaborations that are essential to the continuing success of community-based programs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations29
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Health NursingSame topicHealth and Wellbeing ResearchFrench-language works237,207