MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377018801 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0285771

Association between cancer stigma and cervical cancer screening uptake among women of Dhulikhel and Banepa, Nepal

2023· article· en· W4377018801 on OpenAlexaff
Bandana Paneru, Aerona Karmacharya, A. Bharati, Soniya Makaju, Bikram Adhikari, Dikshya Kafle, Sunila Shakya, Donna Spiegelman, Sangini Seth, Anne Stangl, Aamod Dhoj Shrestha, Archana Shrestha

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsCanadian Red Cross Society
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsCervical cancerMedicineCancerStigma (botany)Cancer screeningGynecologyOncologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer ranks as the most common cancer among Nepalese women with a high incidence and mortality. Despite evidence that effective screening programs reduce disease burden, screening services are under-utilized. Cancer stigma can be a major barrier to cervical cancer screening uptake among Nepalese women. OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the association between cancer stigma and cervical cancer screening uptake among women residing in semi-urban areas of Kavrepalanchok district (Dhulikhel and Banepa), Nepal. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study among 426 women aged 30-60 years using telephone interview method from 15th June to 15th October 2021. A validated Cancer Stigma Scale (CASS) was used to measure cancer stigma and categorized women as presence of cancer stigma if the mean total score was greater than three. We obtained information on cervical cancer screening uptake through self-reported responses. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were performed to assess the association between cancer stigma and cervical cancer screening uptake. We adjusted socio-demographic: age, ethnicity, occupation, religion and education, and reproductive health variables: parity, family planning user, age of menarche and age at first sexual intercourse during multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Twenty-three percent of women had cancer stigma and 27 percent reported that they had ever been screened for cervical cancer. The odds of being screened was 0.23 times lower among women who had stigma compared to those who had no stigma (95% CI: 0.11-0.49) after adjusting for confounders: age, ethnicity, occupation, religion, education, parity, contraceptive use, age of menarche and age at first sexual intercourse. CONCLUSION: Women residing in semi-urban areas of Nepal and had cancer stigma were less likely to have been screened for cervical cancer. De-stigmatizing interventions may alleviate cancer stigma and contribute to higher uptake of cervical cancer screening.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207