MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7075904940 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.7985512

Individual-level characteristics and geospatial factors associated with cervical cancer screening participation in Alberta, Canada: a population-based cross-sectional study

2025· other· en· W7075904940 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Analysis with R
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCervical cancerCervical cancer screeningPublic healthCancer screeningGeospatial analysisLogistic regressionCervical screeningDescriptive statisticsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in women worldwide. Effective primary prevention with human papillomavirus vaccination and secondary prevention with screening can prevent most cervical cancer cases. Cervical cancer screening uptake varies among women in underserved populations. Research that adds to the understanding of the individual and geographic area-level characteristics of women and their screening status is valuable for public health intervention planning. This study aimed to identify these characteristics related to cervical cancer screening status. Methods The study population included women between the ages of 28 to 69 years in Alberta. Data was extracted from administrative health data sources and linked to the Alberta Cervical Cancer Screening Program database to determine screening status. Descriptive bivariate analysis was conducted to describe variations in cervical cancer screening statuses and individual-level sociodemographic, health system factors, and geographic characteristics. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to investigate the relationship between these characteristics and screening participation. Geospatial analyses including heat maps were used to visualize variation in screening participation across the province. Getis-Ord Gi* hot-spot analysis was used to determine the location and magnitude of spatial autocorrelation. Results The study included 933,965 eligible women. Compared with those who are currently up-to-date for screening, those who have no record of screening tend to be older (OR: 3.63; 95% CI: 3.57 to 3.70), reside in the South Zone (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.47 to 1.55), were health system non-users (OR: 2.95: 95% CI: 2.86 to 3.04), did not see a general practitioner (OR: 13.86; 95% CI: 13.32 to 14.43), or had no usual provider of care (OR: 3.227; 95% CI: 3.141 to 3.315). There are statistically significant hot spots of women who are overdue or have no record of cervical cancer screening in the North, Central, and Calgary Zones. Conclusions This study found that cervical cancer screening participation varied across geographical, health system and sociodemographic characteristics and identified clusters of regions with higher proportions of women who are under-screened in Alberta, Canada. Overall, these findings will help inform the design of interventions that aims to improve cervical cancer screening participation among underserved groups.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicData Analysis with RFrench-language works237,207