MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225998071 · doi:10.4103/jrms.jrms_1390_20

Status of breast cancer screening strategies and indicators in Iran

2022· article· en· W4225998071 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Omidi, Maryam Koosha, Najme Nazeri, Nasim Khosravi, Sheida Zolfaghari, Shahpar Haghighat

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research in Medical Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerOncologyGynecologyTraditional medicineCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research in Medical SciencesSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207