Factors Affecting Cervical Cancer Screening Behaviors Based On the Precaution Adoption Process Model: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most preventable cancers in women is cervical cancer. Pap smear test is an effective screening program; however, it is not conducted very frequently. The aim of this study is explaining the determinants affecting women's participation in the Pap smear test based on precaution adoption process model with a qualitative approach. This study was a qualitative approach using a Directed Content Analysis methodology which was conducted in 2014. Participants were 30 rural women who participated in this study voluntarily in sarvabad, Iran. Purposive sampling was initiated and continued until data saturation. Semi-structured interviews were the primary method of data collection. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis and continuous comparisons. Women`s information and awareness about cervical cancer and Pap smear is insufficient and most of them believed that they were not at risk; however, they perceived the severity of the disease. Some of them had no adequate understanding of the test benefits. They pointed to the lack of time, financial difficulties, fear of test result and lack of awareness as the main barriers against the Pap smear test; however, they did not say that they were not willing to do the test. Findings could help health policy makers to find the right area and purpose to facilitate the participation of women in the Pap smear test.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".