Status of breast cancer screening strategies and indicators in Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This scoping review aimed to investigate the status of breast cancer (BC) preventive behaviors and screening indicators among Iranian women in the past 15 years. BC, as the most common cancer in women, represents nearly a quarter (23%) of all cancers. Presenting the comprehensive view of preventive modalities of BC in the past 15 years in Iran may provide a useful perspective for future research to establish efficient services for timely diagnosis and control of the disease. Materials and Methods: The English and Persian articles about BC screening modalities and their indicators in Iran were included from 2005 to 2020. English electronic databases of Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus, and Persian databases of Scientific Information Database (SID) and IranMedex were used. The critical information of articles was extracted and classified into different categories according to the studied outcomes. Results: A total of 246 articles were assessed which 136 of them were excluded, and 110 studies were processed for further evaluation. Performing breast self-examination, clinical breast examination, and mammography in Iranian women reported 0%-79.4%, 4.1%-41.1%, and 1.3%-45%, respectively. All of the educational interventions had increased participants' knowledge, attitude, and practice in performing the screening behaviors. The most essential screening indicators included participation rate (3.8% to 16.8%), detection rate (0.23-8.5/1000), abnormal call rate (28.77% to 33%), and recall rate (24.7%). Conclusion: This study demonstrated heterogeneity in population and design of research about BC early detection in Iran. The necessity of a cost-effective screening program, presenting a proper educational method for increasing women's awareness and estimating screening indices can be the priorities of future researches. Establishing extensive studies at the national level in a standard framework are advised.
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 | 0.015 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".