MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303628943 · doi:10.3390/curroncol29100579

The Implementation of a Primary HPV Self-Testing Cervical Screening Program in Malaysia through Program ROSE—Lessons Learnt and Moving Forward

2022· review· en· W4303628943 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yin Ling Woo, Su Pei Khoo, Patti E. Gravitt, David Hawkes, Reena Rajasuriar, Marion Saville

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical cancerContext (archaeology)Cervical screeningCervical cancer screeningPrimary careHealth careNursingPublic relationsFamily medicinePolitical scienceCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Program ROSE (removing obstacles to cervical screening) is a primary HPV-based cervical screening program that incorporates self-sampling and digital technology, ensuring that women are linked to care. It was developed based on the principles of design thinking in the context of Malaysia. The program illustrates the importance of collaborative partnerships and addressing the multi-faceted barriers from policy changes, and infrastructure readiness to the implementation of a radically new cervical screening program in communities. The paradigm shift in cervical cancer requires a monumental and concerted effort in educating both the healthcare providers and the general public. In this short review, we highlight how Pilot Project ROSE incorporated evidence-based tools that rapidly scaled up to Program ROSE. These ideas and solutions can be adapted and adopted by other countries. Notwithstanding the impact of COVID-19, it is incumbent on countries to pave the road towards the elimination of cervical cancer with pre-existing footpaths.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations37
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207