Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25520573›Full record

ReviewContemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland)2014

Cervical cancer screening and psychosocial barriers perceived by patients. A systematic review.

Alicja Bukowska-Durawa, Aleksandra Luszczynska

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Contemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Barriers to and Facilitators of Cervical Cancer Screening among Women in Southeast Asia: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Variation in Cervical Cancer Screening Preferences among Medically Underserved Individuals in the United States: A Systematic Review.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Interference with endogenous EZH2 reverses the chemotherapy drug resistance in cervical cancer cells partly by up-regulating Dicer expression.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alicja Bukowska-DurawaChair of Clinical Psychology, Health and Rehabilitation, University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Wroclaw, Poland.
Aleksandra LuszczynskaChair of Clinical Psychology, Health and Rehabilitation, University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Wroclaw, Poland ; Trauma, Health, & Hazards Center, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, USA.
Uniwersytet SWPS · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aim of the studyThis study aimed at integrating research discussing the role of perceived psychosocial barriers in cervical cancer screening (CCS) uptake. In particular, we analyzed the evidence for the associations between CCS uptake and perceived psychosocial barriers and frequency of psychosocial barriers identified by women. MATERIAL AND

methodsA systematic search of peer-reviewed papers published until 2011 in 8 databases yielded 48 original studies, analyzing data obtained from 155 954 women. The majority of studies (k = 43) applied correlational design, while 5 had experimental design.

resultsExperimental research indicated a positive effect of 75% of psychosocial interventions targeting barriers. The interventions resulted in a significant increase of CCS uptake. Overall 100% of correlational studies indicated that perceiving lower levels of barriers significantly predicted higher CCS uptake. 53 psychosocial barriers were listed in at least 2 original correlational studies: 9.5% of barriers were related to CCS facilities/environment, 67.9% dealt with personal characteristics of the patient, and 22.6% addressed social factors. As many as 35.9% of perceived barriers referred to negative emotions related to CCS examination procedures and collecting CCS results, whereas 25.7% of barriers referred to prior contacts with health professionals.

conclusionsLeaflets or discussion on psychosocial barriers between patients and health professionals involved in CCS might increase CCS uptake and thus reduce cervical cancer mortality rates. Communication skills training for health professionals conducting CCS might focus on the most frequently reported barriers, referring to emotions related to CCS examination and collecting CCS results.

Indexed as

barrierscervical cancerscreeningsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID25520573
PMCPMC4269002
OpenAlexW2113307203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.