MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297051185 · doi:10.5603/ocp.2022.0024

Uptake of screening mammogram in West Central Illinois during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learned

2022· article· en· W4297051185 on OpenAlexaff
John Agboola, Oluwasola Stephen Ayosanmi, Oluwatobi Mogbojuri, Maureen P. Bezold

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology in Clinical Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DemographySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Breast cancerCancerInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. The study aims to reveal the trend of mammogram uptake in seventeen rural counties in Illinois to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced breast cancer screening in the area. Material and methods. Aggregated data on mammography screening for West Central Illinois was provided by the Illinois Hospital Association. Data for 2018 and 2019 was used to determine the typical monthly and annual screenings for the two years before the onset of COVID-19. Then, the two years’ data was compared to the 2020 data. The monthly mean values for the aggregated 2018 and 2019 data were generated as the base “year” to compare with the monthly value for 2020. Paired t-test analysis was used to find if there were any statistically significant differences between the years and between the base year and 2020. Results. January 2020 revealed an uptick to 2921, which is more than the uptake for January 2018 (2700) and January 2019 (2488), and 13% greater than the mean value of 2594 for the previous two years. This was followed by a gradual decrease in uptake in February 2020 by 4% compared to previous years at a mean of 2518 and a further decline in March (44%), with a drastic fall (98%) by April 2020 at 56 screening mammograms in all 17 counties. The lowest uptake in any three months occurred from March through May 2020. Compared to previous years, an increase in uptake was noted across the region in 2020 June (8%) and July (4%) after the pandemic restrictions were relaxed. Overall, the total uptake in 2020 was 15% less than the average annual uptake for 2018–2019 with a deficit of 5537. There was no statistically significant difference in mammogram uptake across the three years. Conclusions. The findings reveal that there was a significant reduction in uptake during the pandemic restriction period. However, increased uptake during the rest of the year effectively mitigated this reduction to such an extent that there was no statistically significant downturn compared to each of the previous two years. A rising trend in total annual uptake noted in preceding years could have continued without the COVID-19 event.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.420
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.133 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology in Clinical PracticeSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207