MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337719316 · doi:10.1111/jan.12979

Understanding breast health awareness in an Arabic culture: qualitative study protocol

2016· article· en· W2337719316 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Norah Madkhali, Olinda Santin, Helen Noble, Joanne Reid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsMedicineThematic analysisQualitative researchBreast cancerHealth careExploratory researchTabooNursingBreast cancer awarenessFamily medicineEconomic growthPolitical scienceCancerSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To explore breast health awareness and the early diagnosis and detection methods of breast cancer from the perspective of women and primary healthcare providers in the Jizan region of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. BACKGROUND: Although there is a high incidence of advanced breast cancer in young women in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, there is no standardized information about breast self-examination, or is there a national screening programme involving clinical breast examination and mammography available. DESIGN: Qualitative exploratory study. METHODS: Data collection will consist of 36 face-to-face semi-structured interviews: 12 with general practitioners; 12 with nurses at primary healthcare centres and with 12 women who attend the health centres. This study will be carried out in eight states across the Jizan region (four rural and four urban) to reflect the cultural diversity of Jizan. The data will be analysed using thematic content analysis. Research Ethics Committee approval was obtained in June 2015. DISCUSSION: While we understand the enablers and barriers to breast health awareness outside of Saudi culture, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, particularly in rural populations such as Jizan, there is a lack of research. This study will add positively to the international knowledge base of this topic. The findings will give evidence and inform policy about women and healthcare providers' experiences in Jizan, in a society where such topics are taboo.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.297
GPT teacher head0.538
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207