Breast cancer screening among married women in Tanzania: does household structure matter?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research in sub-Saharan Africa has indicated that polygamous arrangements can detrimentally affect married women’s access to various healthcare services, including sexual and reproductive healthcare services. However, despite the pivotal role of breast cancer examination in a comprehensive campaign dedicated to early detection, very little attention has been devoted in the literature to the potential impact of family structure on access to breast cancer screening among married women in Tanzania. Using the 2022 Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey, we addressed this void in the literature. We found that only 6% of married women have undergone breast cancer screening at the national level. Moreover, findings from multivariate logit regression analysis indicate that married women from monogamous marriages were more likely to have undergone breast cancer screening compared to their polygamous counterparts, even after accounting for demographic, socioeconomic, and healthcare characteristics (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.24, 2.64). Based on these findings, we discussed potential implications for policymakers as well as directions for future research.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".