A Nationally Representative US Health and Retirement Study on Mammography Screening Use and Its Predictors Among Older Adult Women Ages 60 to 85
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Mammography use and its predictors among older women require further study. Objectives: Mammography use and its relationship to demographic characteristics, health care access, and breast cancer risk factors in women ages 60 to 85 in the United States were examined. Design: US Health and Retirement Study 2014 dataset was examined. Methods: A descriptive study using secondary data was analyzed for use of mammography screening and its predictors in women ages 60 to 85 in United States. Results: In total, 5177 (73.4%) of respondents reported mammography use. Mammography use was higher among older women who were married, nonsmokers, alcohol drinkers, engaged in vigorous exercise, and had dental visits. Conclusion: Women ages 60+ in the US HRS dataset revealed continued mammography screening into later years (73.4%), and mammography use was higher among older women who had healthy lifestyles and habits. Insights for health care providers and systems are to recommend mammography use for women age 60 to 85 years are provided. This US study can be used to inform future research and policy regarding breast cancer screening among older women.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".