MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323653277 · doi:10.1093/abm/kaac068

Increased Breast and Colorectal Cancer Risk in Type 2 Diabetes: Awareness Among Adults With and Without Diabetes and Information Provision on Diabetes Websites

2023· article· en· W4323653277 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Ashley, Kathryn A. Robb, Daryl B. O’Connor, Rebecca Platt, Mollie Price, Olivia Robinson, Elizabeth L. Travis, Lorraine L. Lipscombe, Ramzi Ajjan, Rebecca Birch

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Behavioral Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersLeeds Beckett University
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesCancerColorectal cancerType 2 Diabetes MellitusInternal medicineGerontologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: People with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have a higher risk of developing breast and bowel cancers but are less likely to participate in cancer screening. PURPOSE: Two interlinked studies examined public awareness of the fact that T2DM increases breast and bowel cancer risk, and provision of this information on diabetes websites. METHODS: Study-1: phase-1 surveyed awareness of T2DM-increased cancer risk in a nationally-representative British sample aged 50-74 (N = 1,458) and compared respondents with and without T2DM (n = 125 vs. n = 1,305); phase-2 surveyed an additional exclusively T2DM sample (N = 319). Study-2: High-ranking diabetes websites (N = 25) were reviewed to determine the rate of inclusion of cancer risk and cancer screening information in evident sections about diabetes-related health conditions. RESULTS: A low proportion of respondents were aware that T2DM increases risk of breast (13.7%) and bowel (27.6%) cancers, compared to much higher awareness of other diabetes-related conditions such as sight loss (82.2%) and foot problems (81.8%). Respondents with T2DM were significantly more likely than those without T2DM to be aware of all the surveyed diabetes-related health conditions (e.g., sight loss, OR: 3.14, 95%CI: 1.61-6.15; foot problems, OR: 2.58, 95%CI: 1.38-4.81), except breast (OR: 0.82, 95%CI: 0.46-1.45) and bowel (OR: 0.95, 95%CI: 0.63-1.45) cancer, for which awareness was equally low among people with and without T2DM. Few diabetes websites with a section on diabetes-related health conditions included cancer in this section (n = 4/19), and fewer still included cancer screening among any noted cancer-protective behaviors (n = 2/4). CONCLUSIONS: There is low public awareness that T2DM increases the risk of developing breast and bowel cancers, even among people with T2DM, which may be partly due to limited information provision regarding T2DM-increased cancer risk from diabetes care providers and organizations.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Behavioral MedicineSame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207