Betwixt and Between Well and Sick in Cervical Precancer: Canadian Women’s Experiences of Recurring HPV Infections and HPV Vaccination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background This research fuses the experiences of a precancer diagnosis with the decision-making surrounding a vaccine that can protect against human papillomavirus strains that women may not have been exposed to. The interviewee cohort is of note as half the women were in their 30s and 40s and 75% were over the age of 26. These groupings are often overlooked in media discourses and narrative research surrounding human papillomavirus and the human papillomavirus vaccine. Purpose Womens' diagnoses and treatment experiences, including colposcopies, biopsies, and Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedures, are chronicled to highlight a liminal, precancerous state-one in which they are not deemed healthy, but nor have they been diagnosed with cancer. These are emotion-filled experiences that are ridden with anxiety and fear, but also ones that are structured with self-care strategies to contain human papillomavirus infections and the risk of cervical cancer. Methods Twenty women who attended Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre's human papillomavirus vaccination clinic were interviewed and their narratives were documented and analyzed to determine their experiences surrounding human papillomavirus infections and precancer as well as their motivations for human papillomavirus vaccination. Results The decision to undergo human papillomavirus vaccination was a self-care strategy that accompanied treatment procedures and was a means to reduce cervical cancer risk. While encouraged with the human papillomavirus vaccine's potential to curb cervical cancer, they had a tempered view of the vaccine and its effectiveness in their cases, given their medical histories. Conclusions The research provides an in-depth accounting of an often overlooked grouping in human papillomavirus and human papillomavirus vaccination research and media discourse which, generally, focuses upon middle-school-aged girls and university-/college-aged women. In addition, the research provides recommendations for practice for cervical precancer diagnoses going forward.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".