Assessing Skin Cancer Risk Factors, Sun Safety Behaviors and Melanoma Concern in Atlantic Canada: A Comprehensive Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of cutaneous melanoma (CM) is increasing at an alarming rate in Canada and elsewhere around the world. Significant regional differences in CM incidence have been identified in Atlantic provinces. The goal of this study is to compare ultraviolet exposure, sun protective behaviours, level of worry and baseline CM knowledge in provinces with a high versus low incidence of CM as well, as between various demographic groups. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted in Atlantic provinces between July 2020 and August 2022. All participants aged ≥ 16 years with a completed survey were eligible. Survey responses were summarized using frequency counts, percentages, and means. Two-sided Z-tests for equality of proportions and logistic regression models were used to compare the survey results between geographic and demographic groups. RESULTS: In total, 7861 participants were included (28.0% men; mean age 61.3 years; response rate 28%). Our results (gender- and age-adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval) show that high-incidence provinces for CM (Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia) had significantly more sunburns (OR 2.00, 1.72-2.31), total sun exposure (OR 2.05, 1.68-2.50), recreational sun exposure (OR 1.95, 1.61-2.35) and tans (OR 1.77, 1.53-2.05) than individuals in low-incidence provinces (Newfoundland and Labrador). However, individuals in high-incidence provinces displayed more protective behaviors: there were less tanning bed users (OR 0.82, 0.71-0.95), they checked their skin more frequently for new moles (OR 1.26, 1.06-1.51) and practiced more sun protection overall. Additional analyses are presented based on education, income, sexual orientation and gender. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that future efforts aimed at reducing the CM burden in Atlantic Canada should be tailored for target geographic and/or demographic groups. LIMITATIONS: the study participants are not representative of the population in Atlantic Canada due to recruitment strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".