MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605340510 · doi:10.5430/jha.v6n2p81

Measuring knowledge and practice in relation to breast cancer screening in mothers in Pakistan

2017· article· en· W2605340510 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sharmeen Amin, Zafeer Ahmed Yazdani, Ankush Jha, Deepika Sriram, Hinozia Merchant, Naveen Reddy Parva, Artur Mirzabekian, Joana Kendra Pascal, Sehrish Sikandar, Zhi Tian Chen, Aakash Kumar, Faris Baig, Muhammad Baseem Sheikh, Zia Imtiaz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hospital Administration · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerSocioeconomic statusBreast self-examinationDeveloping countryConfidence intervalBreast cancer screeningGynecologyPopulationBreast cancer awarenessFamily medicineObstetricsDemographyCancerEnvironmental healthMammographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Breast cancer is a major health burden mainly in the developed countries but its rates are also increasing in the developing countries. With such increasing rates of breast cancer it is imperative that the general population is aware of its risk factors, early screening methods and the preventive measures that can be undertaken before its development.Objective: To assess the awareness of breast-self-examination (BSE) & screening among the mothers belonging to different socioeconomic groups in Karachi, Pakistan. To assess the awareness of breast lump & its relation with breast cancer in mothers.Methods: This is a cross sectional research study constituting on a sample size of 284 people. The data was collected using a self administered questionnaire which was designed after detailed literature review. The date was collected from all 5 districts of Karachi, Pakistan. The duration of data collection was from April 2013 to November 2013. The data was analyzed using spss 19 with a 95% confidence interval and a 5% margin of error. A p-value of .05 or less was considered significant.Results: The results showed that most of the women (81%) have sufficient general knowledge about breast cancer and its outcomes but the awareness regarding the risk factors was limited. Only 38% were aware that old age is a risk factor, 34.9% knew that null parity is a risk factor while 57.7% believed that trauma to the breast, for example child hitting the breast, cause breast disease. The women were only partially aware of the screening methods available, only 53.2% of women knew how to self-examine their breast and 69% of them were not aware of the fact that mammography is the basic screening procedure. Results are similar for knowledge about signs and symptoms and only 46.8% were aware that bloody discharge and inward retraction of nipple may be due to breast cancer. Despite the limited current awareness about the breast diseases most women (82.4%) showed interest in learning more information about breast diseases and how might they be prevented.Conclusions: The study concluded that though the mothers were aware of breast cancer they still require sufficient knowledge regarding its risks, methods of screening and means to prevent it. In accordance with this need more initiatives should be undertaken to spread more awareness regarding this through media or other useful sources. But increasing awareness alone cannot deliver the desired results and there is a parallel need to increase the facilities and to make them accessible for all. Steps should also be undertaken to educate the women about their misconceptions regarding breast cancer and to make them free from unnecessary barriers as many women do not seek clinical advice due to these barriers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hospital AdministrationSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207