MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245723953 · doi:10.24124/2011/bpgub772

Intimate stories: Examining Prince George women's awareness about and use of cervical screening services.

2011· dissertation· en· W4245723953 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Virginia Lynn Russell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingCervical screeningReproductive healthMedicineCervical cancerPsychological interventionPsychologyNursingSocial psychologyEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research was to examine contributing factors in women's use of cervical screening and to promote cervical health and screening awareness for young and/or vulnerable women in Prince George, B.C. The project was a community-based participatory research project that took place over a six-month period and organized in three stages, including: 1) using questionnaires with women in the community to try to better understand women's lives and lived experiences, 2) facilitating health groups for four months to build deeper relationships with women in the community and, 3) offering two community workshops to promote cervical health and screening. The objectives of the first two stages were to examine women's experiences with health services, and understand their personal her/stories and various health determinants that impacted them. The objective of the stage three was to evaluate how awareness about sexual health topics (i.e., the human papillomavirus (HPV), and cervical health/screening) changed as a result of arts-based and peer-driven interventions. Results from this study indicated that social determinants such as finances and education play an important role in women's awareness about, access to, and use of cervical screening services. Further to this, her/stories of victimization, gendered feelings, feelings of disempowerment, and life circumstances also significantly influenced women's comfort levels with, access to, and use of cervical cancer screening services in Prince George, B.C. --P. iii.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.491
GPT teacher head0.569
Teacher spread0.078 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParticipatory Visual Research MethodsFrench-language works237,207