MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232362433 · doi:10.31038/cst.2016114

Cancer Education in Nigeria: Reflections on a Community-based Intervention by a Physicians’ Association

2016· article· en· W4232362433 on OpenAlexaff
Kelechi Eguzo, Christie Akwaowo, Uwemedimbuk Ekanem, Catherine Eyo, Emem Abraham

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Studies and Therapeutics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssociation (psychology)Intervention (counseling)MedicineFamily medicineMedical educationNursingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundCancer has become an increasingly important source of morbidity and mortality in Nigeria; however our country lacks an organized cancer control system.Low awareness about the disease spectrum among health professionals (HCP) and health policymakers (HPM) is among the challenges affecting cancer control in Nigeria.This reflection describes the process of providing cancer education in Nigeria to HCP and HPM, through the Cancer Control in Primary Care (CCPC) course.It also shares our experiences during the planning, and challenges encountered. Methods MedicalWomen's Association of Nigeria partnered with American Society of Clinical Oncology to deliver cancer education in Akwa Ibom State of Nigeria in February 2016.The main learning objectives were: • Provide HCP working in Akwa Ibom State with essential knowledge on cancer control • Provide evidence-based management strategies • Promote multidisciplinary approach for managing breast and cervical cancers • Promote the formulation of a cancer control policy in the state • Share knowledge and experiences with others working in the field Course lasted 3 days, and featured didactic lectures (n=11); demonstrations and simulations (n=4); and plenary sessions (n=7).Course was planned using emails, phone calls, WhatsApp® chats and text messages. ResultsCourse was successful with a daily attendance of >140 participants comprising physicians, nurses and policymakers in primary, secondary, tertiary and private health facilities in the state.Over 97% of the participants had improved their knowledge of cancers through the course.We also identified local priorities for cancer control.Use of multiple approaches to recruitment and funding, as well as working with various local partners were crucial to our success. ConclusionChallenges encountered in providing cancer education through this medium include funding, recruitment of participants and event management.Overall, the use of the CCPC course to improve cancer education has proven to be successful, cost-effective and important in building practice networks among HCP and HPM in Akwa Ibom State.We recommend this approach for improving cancer education in resource-limited settings.Outcome of course evaluation will be shared in a different communication.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0190.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.427 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Studies and TherapeuticsSame topicAdvances in Oncology and RadiotherapyFrench-language works237,207