MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cervical Cancer Screening Access for Women Who Experience Imprisonment in Ontario, Canada

2018· article· en· W2904111328 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fiona G. Kouyoumdjian, Andres McConnon, Emma R. S. Herrington, Kinwah Fung, Aïsha Lofters, Stephen W. Hwang

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalMcMaster UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical cancerPrisonPopulationImprisonmentCervical screeningDemographyInterquartile rangeRetrospective cohort studyOdds ratioIncidence (geometry)GynecologyCancerPsychologyEnvironmental healthSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Women who experience imprisonment have higher rates of cervical cancer. Lack of access to cervical cancer screening in the community or in prison may contribute to increased cervical cancer incidence. Objectives: To determine cervical cancer screening rates for women in provincial prison in Ontario, Canada, and to compare these data with data for the general population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used correctional and health administrative data from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2013. Participants included Ontario women aged 21 to 69 years during the follow-up period with no history of cervical cancer or hysterectomy. Analyses were conducted between July 2017 and September 2018. Exposures: Women admitted to Ontario provincial prison in 2009 or 2010 and released in 2010 were considered exposed, and women in the general population of Ontario were considered unexposed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Whether women were overdue for cervical cancer screening at the time of admission to prison or on July 1, 2010, for the general population, defined as not having been screened in the previous 3 years, and whether women who were overdue were still overdue after 3 years. Results: There were 4553 women in the prison group and 3 647 936 women in the general population group. The median (interquartile range) age was 36 (29-43) years in the prison group and 43 (34-53) years in the general population. Women in the prison group had 2.20 times (95% CI, 2.08-2.33) the odds of being overdue for cervical cancer screening compared with women in the general population after adjusting for neighborhood income quintile, at 53.9% (95% CI, 51.8%-56.1%) compared with 32.9% (95% CI, 32.8%-33.0%) (P < .001). Women in the prison group also had nearly twice the odds of still being overdue at 3 years, with an odds ratio of 1.87 (95% CI, 1.76-1.99) after adjusting for neighborhood income quintile, and rates of still being overdue of 36.2% (95% CI, 34.5%-38.0%) compared with 21.9% (95% CI, 21.8%-21.9%) (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Women who experience imprisonment have worse cervical cancer screening access than women in the general population. Work should be done to promote cervical cancer screening awareness and to improve access to acceptable screening in prison and in the community after prison release.

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)0.003
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations36
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207