Systematic Review of Interventions to Increase Awareness of Ultraviolet Radiation-Induced Harm and Protective Behaviors in Post-Secondary School Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
College and university students are a group known for excessive sun exposure and indoor tanning. Health education campaigns for avoidance of ultraviolet (UV) radiation have been relatively unsuccessful in this population. This systematic review examines interventions aimed at post-secondary school young adults on college and university campuses for skin cancer awareness, photoprotection, and change in UV-exposure-related behavior. Fifty-nine studies were identified for inclusion according to predetermined criteria. Study heterogeneity was high; methods of intervention were individual or group-based, and were mostly visually delivered and/or passive learning. Most interventions occurred at a single time point. Intervention success was assessed by evaluating subject behavior, intention, attitudes, knowledge, and emotion. Multicomponent interventions, generally consisting of UV photography and a passively delivered educational component, may be more effective than a single component alone. Overall, study quality was poor. Sample size of the majority of studies was <150 subjects. Most studies used self-report of behavior and had a short follow-up time. Generalizability of findings may be impacted as women, particularly white/Caucasian women, were overrepresented in the studies identified by this systematic review. For this specific target population, themes arising from the review include the importance of self-relevance and message framing. Self-affirmation was identified as a potential challenge in designing interventions for this target group, which can lead to defensiveness and a negative reaction to the health message. The findings of this systematic review may inform future research in this field, as well as guide planning of effective interventions in this target population.
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 | 0.008 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".