Abstract 36: Examining Policies and Guidelines to Improve the Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Pathway for Patients and Health Providers in Tanzania: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose: Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in women around the globe. It has been identified as the most common cancer in Tanzania, resulting in about 9772 new cases and 6695 deaths each year. Several research studies have identified the importance of adequate and timely policies and guidelines to optimize the cervical cancer prevention and treatment pathway in the nation. However, there is scant literature on the perspectives of all stakeholders (e.g., patients, key informants, healthcare providers, and non-healthcare providers). Our study aims to better understand the recommendations from important stakeholders to inform current and upcoming policies and guidelines, and overall, improve the cervical cancer screening and treatment cascade in rural Tanzania and other African countries. Methods: We leveraged a framework for conducting a health systems assessment to identify healthcare providers’ perspectives on effective cervical cancer screening, prevention and control in Tanzania. We adapted interview topic guides for cervical cancer screening using the health systems assessment framework conceptualized by Risso-Gill and colleagues designed initially for evaluating hypertension control. Study participants (71) were interviewed between 2014-2018. This included key stakeholders, patients, healthcare providers and non-healthcare providers. Results: Through the interviews and focus group discussions that were conducted, three major themes emerged: 1) policies and guidelines, 2) burden of disease in relation to policies, and 3) treatment and follow-up. Sub-themes relating to policies and guidelines included health policies, governmental influence, data collection, and revision of HPV vaccination guidelines. Sub-themes for burden of disease included the rise in overall cases of cervical cancer. Subthemes for treatment and follow-up included quality of care, dissatisfaction with care, and patient safety and well-being. Conclusion: It is evident that significant changes must be made to existing policies and guidelines to improve many aspects of the cervical cancer screening and treatment pathway, to benefit healthcare providers and patients alike in rural Tanzania. There is also a critical need to implement new initiatives and programs to increase uptake and allow for informed-decision making among women. Citation Format: Melinda Chelva, Sanchit Kaushal, Nicola West, Erica Erwin, Prisca Dominic Marandu, Safina Yuma, Donna Shelley, Karen Yeates. Examining Policies and Guidelines to Improve the Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Pathway for Patients and Health Providers in Tanzania: A Qualitative Study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Symposium on Global Cancer Research; Closing the Research-to-Implementation Gap; 2023 Apr 4-6. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023;32(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 36.
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 | 0.020 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".