Perceived Risk of Breast Cancer in Relation to Precautionary Behavior among Females in Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: For the last two decades, the number of women with breast cancer in Saudi Arabia increased steadily. Risk perceptions or an individual's perceived susceptibility to a threat are a key component of many health behavior change theories. Little is known about relationships between risk perceptions of breast cancer and performing preventive practices. This descriptive study highlights the risk perception of breast cancer in relation to preventive interventions among females over 18 years old in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methods: Cross-sectional descriptive correlational design. An online questionnaire was conducted with 500 participants aged 18 years and older. The questionnaire was self-administrated electronic questionnaire designed by using Google Forms and it gated broadcast through social media channels such as WhatsApp and twitter. Results: The study emphasized a low risk perceptions about breast cancer and performing preventive practices. Positive correlation was found between female's risk perceptions and doing the mammogram screening. Conclusions: Findings will be helpful to use risk perception of breast cancer in the prediction of women adopting preventive measures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".