Experiences of accessing and using breast cancer services in Vietnam: a descriptive qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To understand, describe and analyse the experiences of women with breast cancer in Vietnam when accessing and using breast cancer services. DESIGN: Descriptive qualitative study. Women were interviewed about their experiences from the first time they became aware of symptoms or changes to their body through treatment and post-treatment. This study is the first descriptive study on breast cancer in Vietnam from the perspective of women with a breast cancer diagnosis. PARTICIPANTS: Women (n=13) who had completed or were still receiving treatment for breast cancer, purposively recruited from the north and south of Vietnam. RESULTS: An analysis of the experiences of women with breast cancer in Vietnam revealed a lack of awareness and knowledge about breast cancer and symptoms. Family and social support were described as key factors influencing whether a woman accesses and uses breast cancer services. Cost of treatment and out-of-pocket expenditures limited access to services and resulted in significant financial challenges for women and their families. CONCLUSIONS: Vietnam has made huge strides in improving cancer care, and is tackling a complex and expanding public health challenge, however, there are a number of areas requiring strengthening and future research. While Vietnam has successfully expanded social health insurance coverage, changes that increase the percentage of costs covered for specific treatments, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy, could benefit women and their families.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".