MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415525659 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0335460

Knowledge and practice of breast self-examination and associated factors among women with breast cancer in Kabul, Afghanistan

2025· article· en· W4415525659 on OpenAlexaff
Mohadeseh Ahmadi, Arash Nemat, Rohullah Sakhi, Arezu Nasrati, Reza Amiri

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerLogistic regressionMultivariate analysisBivariate analysisCancerMEDLINEKnowledge level

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality among women worldwide, and it has poor prognosis if diagnosed at late stages. Common breast cancer detection methods include mammography, clinical breast exams (CBE), and breast self-examination (BSE). Breast self-examination is the most cost-effective strategy for early detection in low- and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the knowledge and practice of breast self-examination, along with associated factors, among women with breast cancer visiting Ali Abad Teaching Hospital in Kabul, Afghanistan in 2025. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among 290 Afghan women aged 20-80 who were either currently or previously admitted to the Oncology department of Ali Abad Teaching Hospital for regular follow-ups or treatment. Data was collected using an interviewer-administered questionnaire between January and February 2025. Chi-square tests were conducted to examine the associations between BSE knowledge, BSE practice, and potential explanatory factors. Those that showed significant associations in the bivariate analyses were considered potential confounders and included in multivariable logistics regression analysis. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 42.9 ± 14.7. Majority of the participants were illiterate (83.8%) and unemployed (95.9%). Women with education of secondary level or higher were more likely to practice BSE than those who were illiterate (AOR: 3.65, 95% CI: 1.06-12.76). Participants with good knowledge level were more likely to practice BSE than those who had a poor knowledge of BSE (AOR: 5.28, 95% CI: 2.45-12.48). In addition, women who had heard of BSE were more likely to practice it compared to those who had not (AOR: 4.31, 95% CI: 1.37-19.25). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, education, knowledge score, and awareness of BSE (i.e., having heard of BSE) were selected as important predictors for practice of BSE via both bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. While about 50% of participants demonstrated good knowledge of BSE, only 18% were practicing it, and among those who did, only about 30% were performing it at the right time and frequency. These findings highlight the importance of educational programs with an aim to increase breast cancer awareness among women in Afghanistan, and to promote breast self-examination as a low-cost, accessible tool for early detection - helping to alleviate cancer burden in the country.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening→French-language works237,207→