MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2533798833 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v7n2p117

Efficacy of counseling for cervical cancer screening and protective procedures on Saudi women’s health beliefs and practice

2016· article· en· W2533798833 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Soliman Aziza, Amany S. Badawy, Fouad Abeer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeanship of Scientific Research, King Saud UniversityKing Saud University
KeywordsCervical cancerMedicineCancerGynecologyFamily medicinePap testObstetricsPopulationTest (biology)Incidence (geometry)Cervical cancer screeningEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer of women in the world, and it becomes a major cause of cancer mortality in low-income countries due to inadequate use of screening services. Currently, little is known regarding cervical cancer incidence in Arabic countries. In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, cervical cancer occurs in 4.1/100,000 females in the population. It accounts for 7% of all newly diagnosed cancers in females, and is the eighth leading cause of cancer deaths in Saudi females. Although, the Pap smear test is available at the health setting, the community health awareness program is not well established. Over the past 2 decades, the number of cases of cervical cancer has been increasing due to lack of awareness about Pap smear testing. Objective: The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of counseling about cervical cancer in changing Saudi women’s beliefs and practices toward screening and protective procedures. Methods: A Quasi-experimental design that included 100 Saudi women who were administered a structured questionnaire and a Health Belief Model Scale for Cervical Cancer and Pap Smear Test prior to receiving counseling and follow up. Results: Before counselling, Chi Square test showed a statistical significant 11.649 ( p = .02) in relation to the symptoms of cervical cancer. As regarding the methods of cervical cancer diagnosis 45.0% agreed that a checkup should be done every year for early diagnosis and 63.0% believed that early marriage and null-gravidity are leading factors for cervical cancer, while 32.0% and 37.0% agree with lack of community awareness about cervical cancer and neglect of abnormal genital symptoms. A highly statistical significance with ( p = .005) in relation to the methods of diagnosis for cervical cancer. 66.0% know about Pap smear testing, while 67.0% had no previous Pap smear examination. The knowledge about HPV vaccination was very low (94.0%) don’t know about HPV vaccination. Post counselling protective practice from cervical cancer showed a high significance related to Pap smear ( p = .001) and HPV vaccine, vaginal hygiene care and balanced diet ( p = .05). There was no statistical significance in relation to self-examination of the vulva ( p = .32). Conclusions: Primarily beliefs and practices among women in the target group should be evaluated to increase their participation in cervical cancer screening and to develop effective education strategies. There is a need to educate the general community about the disease and its prevention.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.396 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207