MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2773337428 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0189534

Knowledge about human papillomavirus and prevention of cervical cancer among women of Arkhangelsk, Northwest Russia

2017· article· en· W2773337428 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Roik, Ekaterina Sharashova, Evert Nieboer, O A Kharkova, Vitaly A. Postoev

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionHuman papillomavirusContext (archaeology)Cervical cancerFamily medicineYoung adultCancer preventionHPV vaccinesGynecologyDemographyTest (biology)GerontologyHPV infectionCancerNursingInternal medicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about cervical cancer (CC) risk factors and benefits of CC prevention motivates women to participate in its screening. However, several studies show that there is a significant knowledge deficit worldwide about human papillomavirus (HPV). The current study explores the level of knowledge about HPV and CC prevention in the context of sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics of women who visited an antenatal clinic in Arkhangelsk, Russia. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in the city of Arkhangelsk, which seats the administrative center of Arkhangelsk County, Northwest Russia. It included women who consulted a gynecologist for any reason between January 1, 2015 and April 30, 2015, were residents of Arkhangelsk, 25 to 65 years of age and sexually active (N = 300). Student's t-test for continuous variables and Pearson's χ2 test for categorical variables were used in the comparisons of women grouped as having either poor or sufficient knowledge. Linear regression analysis was also employed. RESULTS: The level of knowledge about HPV and CC prevention was associated with education, parity, age of initiating of intercourse, and sources of information. After adjustment, women with university education were more likely to have higher knowledge about HPV and CC prevention compared to those with lower education. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that most participants had a sufficient level of knowledge. Educational gaps were identified that potentially could be used to tailor interventions in CC 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→