An Adapted Cancer Screening Education Program for Native American Women With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and Their Caregivers: Protocol for Feasibility and Acceptability Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) do not undergo breast and cervical cancer screening at the same rate as women without IDD. IDDs are diagnosed in childhood, are lifelong, and involve difficulties in adaptive behaviors and intellectual functioning. Native American women also experience disparities in breast and cervical cancer screenings. Despite known disparities, women with IDD are often not included in health promotion programs, and there is a need for evidence-based programming for those with intersectional identities, such as Native American women with IDD. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the feasibility and acceptability of My Health My Choice (MHMC), an adaptation of the Women Be Healthy 2 program. There are 2 parts to the study: adaptation of the Women Be Healthy 2 program and feasibility and acceptability testing of MHMC. METHODS: Individuals aged over 18 years who identify as Native American females with IDD and their caregivers (N=30 women-caregiver dyads) are eligible for the study. Participants, who are affiliated with 2 partnering sites in Arizona (1 rural and 1 urban), complete pre- and postsurveys assessing knowledge, self-efficacy, and screening expectations before and immediately after completing the program. In addition, all participants complete brief satisfaction surveys after each of the 6 educational sessions. A subsample of Native American women with an IDD (n=12), caregivers (n=12), and community health educators (n=2) who participate in the MHMC program will provide semistructured qualitative input regarding the content, delivery, and cultural relevance of the program. RESULTS: The adaptation of the culturally responsive MHMC program was completed in August 2021. In November 2021, the project team began recruitment for feasibility and acceptability studies. Feasibility will be examined using participation metrics, and acceptability will be measured using satisfaction measures. Pre- and postmeasures in cancer screening knowledge, self-efficacy, and screening expectations will examine improvements among participants. CONCLUSIONS: The results of feasibility and acceptability testing of MHMC will guide future implementation studies of the program. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/37801.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".