MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403816450 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckae144.1692

Assessing cancer prevention literacy among European population: a cross-sectional study

2024· article· en· W4403816450 on OpenAlexaff
Paula Romeo‐Cervera, Marina Pinto‐Carbó, A. Blanco-Cabañes, M A Torres-Mariner, Jaime Fons‐Martínez, Mercedes Vanaclocha‐Espí, Susana Castán Cameo, Teresa De Pablo-Pardo, Ana Molina‐Barceló

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSchool Health and Nursing Education
Canadian institutionsCargill (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross-sectional studyHealth literacyMedicineEnvironmental healthCancer preventionCancerPolitical scienceInternal medicineHealth carePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Cancer prevention literacy (CPL) is essential for empowering individuals to make health-informed decisions and adopt preventive measures to reduce their cancer risk. This study aims to measure CPL among the European population. Methods A cross-sectional population-based study was conducted from February to March 2024 among European residents over 18 years old (N = 2312) in the context of BUMPER Project (https://bumper.cancer.eu/). An online self-administered questionnaire was developed including: sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, country of residence, educational level), and CPL (general and by European Code Against Cancer -ECAC- topics). A descriptive analysis was performed and the chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis test were calculated to examine the relationship between CPL and sociodemographic variables. Results 44.2% showed a high level of CPL, followed by 39.5% with medium, and 16.3% with low level. 61.1% of participants are not aware of ECAC. ECAC topics with higher levels of knowledge are: UV exposure (88.3%), pollution (81.6%), tobacco (78.7%), second-hand smoking (60.9%). ECAC topics with lower levels are: hormone replacement therapy (47.9%), breastfeeding (41.6%), and vaccination (32.9%). Statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) are observed in CPL level by gender, country of residence, and educational level. Those with a higher % of low CPL levels are men (22.8%), people from West and South Europe (20.8% and 18.1%), and primary education level (34.7%). Conclusions CPL level is medium-high among the European population, with social and gender inequalities. Further studies are needed to delve into these inequalities. Key messages • The cancer prevention literacy level is medium-high among the European population, with social and gender inequalities. • There is a need of tailored interventions to address social inequalities in cancer prevention literacy among European population.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.567
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicSchool Health and Nursing EducationFrench-language works237,207