Efficacy of an appearance‐based and a health‐based sun protection intervention on summer vacationers' behaviours, PRISME cluster randomized crossover trial, France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Sun-seeking vacationers are particularly vulnerable to melanoma. Appearance-based interventions (ABi) showing skin damage of ultraviolet exposure may be a promising prevention tool to improve skin protection. This study aimed to measure and compare the efficacy of an ABi and a health-based intervention (HBi) on French summer vacationers' behaviours and to identify differences between subpopulations. DESIGN: A cluster randomized crossover trial with three intervention groups (control, ABi, HBi) was conducted in eight campsites on the French Mediterranean coast in summer 2019. METHODS: 1355 vacationers of both sexes and aged 12-55 years were included and followed up after 4 days (T1) and 14 months (T2). Efficacy of interventions was evaluated using multilevel mixed-effect models comparing groups on three outcomes: self-reported sun protection behaviours, sunbathing and skin colour measures. Protection behaviours were analysed according to subpopulations. RESULTS: Compared to controls, the ABi group had a higher protection and sunbathed for fewer hours at T1 and T2. In the HBi group, the skin colour was lighter than controls at T1. When comparing ABi to HBi, ABi participants had lower exposure than HBi at T1 and T2. The protection of people with a 3-years university degree was higher in the HBi group than in others groups while that of people with a secondary school certificate was higher in the ABi group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides further evidence of individual sun protection interventions effect in a touristic setting and highlights the relevance of ABi messages to supplement HBi messages, particularly in certain subpopulations with low to intermediate education levels.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".