MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386656601 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckab164.524

Breast self-examination among older women in Ireland: The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing -TILDA

2021· article· en· W4386656601 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nancy Bhardwaj, Patricia Fitzpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionOdds ratioLongitudinal studyConfidence intervalBreast cancerDemographyBreast self-examinationBreast cancer screeningFamily historyGynecologyGerontologyFamily medicineMammographyCancerInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Regular breast self-examination (BSE) is a simple, cost-effective way of early breast cancer detection, particularly for women outside eligible screening age and for interval cancers. Although mammographic screening is the current most effective breast screening tool, the importance of regular BSE and breast awareness may be overlooked. The study aimed to identify socio-demographic, lifestyle and health-related factors associated with BSE practice among women in Ireland. Methods This study was conducted using Wave 4 data from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA), which collects health-related information from people aged 50 plus in biennial data collection waves. Those women aged 50-64 (eligible breast screening age in 2016) were selected. Following univariate analysis, logistic regression analysis was performed on selected variables to determine the factors independently associated with BSE practice. Results The prevalence of BSE was 70.7%. There was no significant association found between socio-demographic, lifestyle or health related factors and BSE. On logistic regression analysis, family history of cancer was not found to be associated with increased practice of BSE (Adjusted Odds Ratio (OR) 1.02, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.79-1.31, p = 0.86). Having attended for mammogram showed a non-significant reduction in the likelihood of doing BSE (Adjusted OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58-1.02, p = 0.07). Conclusions There are few studies on BSE from developed countries and this is the first from Ireland. BSE prevalence was 61%, 22.6% and 46.8% from Canada, United Kingdom and United States respectively, and was considerably lower from Asian and African countries. Women in this study were more educated than the general population counterparts, this might have overestimated BSE prevalence and obscured true associations. While we did not identify significant associations there is a suggestion that attending for mammography reduces women's interest in BSE. Key messages Being ‘Breast Aware’ and BSE are important alongside mammography for early detection of breast cancer. In countries where screening mammography is unavailable, BSE is an important detection tool.

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)0.002
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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public Health→Same topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening→French-language works237,207→