The impact of education on the use of breat self- examination among Canadian women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the level of education that Canadian women have and their use of breast self-examination (BSE). The secondary objective of this study was to do some exploratory research to measure how the demographic characteristics of these women, and the behaviours that they chose to participate in, might be associated to their use of BSE. This exploratory research was done to gain a better understanding of what kinds of lifestyle and behavioural factors are associated with the use of BSE, and how these factors impact on the relationship that education has on women's use of BSE. The data for the women in the sample were taken from the 1990 Population Health Survey, conducted by Statistics Canada. This survey included questions related to both the demographic characteristics of this population, and their behavioural choices in regards to various healthy lifestyle factors. Education was found to be significantly related to the use of BSE. Many of the demographic variables (age, income, marital status and language) were also found to be significantly related to the use of BSE. The behavioural variables (tobacco use, alcohol use) did not reflect such a strong relationship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".