Breast Health Educational Interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health education programs supported by women's groups or workplaces have been successful in reaching large populations and changing intentions to perform breast health behaviors. This study examined the responses women working in the automotive industry had to two health education interventions, mailed pamphlets, and a combination of mailed material and classes at the worksite compared to a control group. A quasi-experimental design was used. Of the 948 women completing the pre-test, 437 also completed the post-test and were highly representative of the initial sample. The findings suggest that although the mailed information produced some change in practices and intentions, the classes in combination with the mailed pamphlets produced greater change. In addition, confidence in breast self examination as a method of detecting an existing breast lump increased from pre-test to post-test across all age groups. The reported influences on the women's decisions related to breast health varied across the life span. The results of this study can be used to support the development of effective health promotion programs for use at workplaces to increase the likelihood of women engaging in healthy breast practices.
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) | 0.009 | 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".