Cervical Cancer Stigma Among Caribbean Population: A Descriptive Paper
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Cervical cancer prevention practices are desperately low in the Caribbean. This study aims to describe the cervical cancer stigma and to evaluate the influence of the prevention practices among the Caribbean non-patient population in Jamaica, Grenada, Trinidad and Tobago. Methods: A cross-sectional study involving 1,207 participants was conducted using a culturally trans-created Cancer Stigma Scale for the Caribbean context and supplemented with questions on cervical cancer and HPV/HPV vaccine knowledge and beliefs. Data collection took place online from October 2022 to March 2023. Results: Participants are young, single, well-educated, and have stable financial resources. Over a quarter (26.4%) agreed women with cervical cancer are more isolated in their country. Almost half (47%) of respondents agreed cultural background plays a big part in how they feel about illness and getting well. One in six participants believe women with cervical cancer are treated with less respect than usual by others in their country. Conclusion: Cancer stigma of cervical cancer exists in Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, and Grenada. Particularly, cultural background and social norms are closely linked to stigma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".