MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6980424082

Cancer awareness messages in the UK print media: a content analytical and corpus linguistic mixed methods study

2016· article· en· W6980424082 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCLOK (University of Central Lancashire) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCopyright and Intellectual Property
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperPerceptionAudience measurementReadabilityQuarter (Canadian coin)Content analysisPrint mediaReading (process)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Newspaper readership in the UK is high. Exposure to media stories has been shown to influence reader perceptions and newspapers are frequently used as part of cancer awareness campaigns. However we don’t know what happens to the cancer awareness message when it reaches the print media or whether people featured in cancer-related personal interest stories reflect current cancer inequalities. This study forms the first stage of a PhD and looks at the people featured and the language used to see how cancer is currently reported in the UK print media and how this might influence the public’s awareness and perception of the disease. Methods UK national and regional/local newspaper articles featuring a personal interest story about an individual’s journey with ovarian cancer over a seven-and-a-half year period were identified from the Nexis database. Content analytical methods were used to code information about the newspaper, demographic information about the people featured, and key cancer awareness information such as whether a list of symptoms was provided, or whether early detection was linked to better survival. WMatrix3 was used to conduct corpus linguistic analyses of the language used in the articles including key words, themes, and patterns of words appearing together by comparing the articles to a corpus of standard written English (British National Corpus Written Sampler). Results Newspaper coverage decreased with increasing age; only 34.51% (n=156) of articles featured individuals aged over 50. Managers/professionals were featured twice as often as non-professionals (14.82%, n=67 vs 29.8%, n=68). Only a quarter (26.77%, n=121) of articles provided a list of symptoms and even fewer linked early detection and survival (16.81%, n=76) or described the age group most at risk (13.05%, n=59). Corpus linguistic analyses utilising log likelihood (LL) across the years revealed distinctly negative use of language reflecting sadness (LL=+17.03, n=36 [2006] to LL=+72.13, n=105 [2009]) and death (LL=+16.27, n=92 [2012] to LL=+114.29, n=139 [2007]), as well as frequent use of battle language. Conclusions Stories about an individual’s journey with ovarian cancer in UK newspapers tend to be negative, lack educational content and do not reflect those most at risk. The next steps of the project are: 1) tracking specific campaigns through the print media to see what happens to the message and how any related personal interest stories are presented 2) understanding why articles are presented in this way through interviewing press release officers, journalists and editors.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.213 · 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