MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963759117

Promising practices used by International Medical Graduate Physicians to increase cervical screening in South Asian and Chinese immigrants in the Greater Toronto Area

2018· dissertation· en· W2963759117 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M D Russell W Steele

Bibliographic record

Venuee-scholar@UOIT (University of Ontario Institute of Technology) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationFamily medicineMedicineMedical educationGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cervical cancer is one of the most preventable cancers, with Pap tests being a widely accessible form of screening throughout Canada. However, participation in cervical cancer screening is historically lower in South Asian and Chinese immigrants. Previous literature showed that the risk of being under-screened is even higher for these women if they receive care from a provider that is from a culturally congruent region. This investigation aimed to qualitatively explore this phenomenon through the perspective of South Asian and Chinese International-Medical Graduate (IMG) physicians. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to identify barriers to cervical screening faced by South Asian and Chinese immigrants across the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), as well as promising practices that are currently being used by IMG physicians to increase cervical screening participation among their patients. Several barriers to and interventions designed to screening were identified at the individual, community, and health care provider level. Promising interventions include linguistically and culturally appropriate health education and access to a female provider.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuee-scholar@UOIT (University of Ontario Institute of Technology)Same topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207