Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices on Breast Self-Examination of Students in the Health Area of Two Universities in the City of Cartagena
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the knowledge, attitudes and practices on the self-examination of university students in the health area of the universities of the city of Cartagena. MATERIALS & METHODS: descriptive study, 415 students over 20 years old from the health of two universities of Cartagena participated, a multistage sampling was used, first a stratification was done for each university and health area program and then for semesters of universities with proportional fixation. The information collected was stored in Microsoft Excel 10 spreadsheet and analyzed using the statistical package SPSS 24. RESULTS: In the assessment of knowledge, attitudes and practices on breast self-examination, it was found that 82.4% of the surveyed population knows how it is performed, 95.9% consider that self-examination is good, but only 74.5%% has been done. CONCLUSION: Most of the students have good knowledge about breast self-examination, and a favorable attitude toward this procedure, however they do not do it properly, why they do not do it as often or at the right time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".