Trial reportPloS one2015
Barriers to and facilitators of compliance with clinic-based cervical cancer screening: population-based cohort study of women aged 23-60 years.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 26 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mailing Vaginal or Urine Self-Sampling Kits versus Conventional Invitation Letters: A Randomized Trial to Assess the Effect on Cervical Cancer Screening Attendance.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Trial
- Effectiveness of Clinic-Based Patient-Led Human Papillomavirus DNA Self-Sampling among HIV-Infected Women in Uganda.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Trial
- Acceptance of Self-Sampling Among Long-Term Cervical Screening Non-Attenders with HPV-Positive Results: Promising Opportunity for Specific Cancer Education.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021Trial
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of repeated self-sampling for HPV testing in primary cervical screening: a randomized study.BMC cancer · 2020Trial
- Article
- Testing menstrual blood for human papillomavirus during cervical cancer screening in China: cross sectional population based study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2026Observational
- Barriers and facilitators to a combined strategy of HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening among Mexican women.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- AFP promotes cancer multidrug resistance through activating PI3K/Akt/NF-κB signaling pathway.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Examining cervical cancer screening adherence: how does healthism influence participation?BMC public health · 2025Article
- The Role of cf-HPV DNA as an Innovative Biomarker for Predicting the Recurrence or Persistence of Cervical Cancer.Viruses · 2025Article
- Barriers to and facilitators of screening for cervical and breast cancer: Experiences of non-adherent women with current or previous drug use.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
- Screening for breast and cervical cancer among OST patients: a qualitative study of barriers and suggested interventions to increase participation.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2023Article
- Are Canadian Women Prepared for the Transition to Primary HPV Testing in Cervical Screening? A National Survey of Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Facilitators and Barriers to HPV Self-Sampling as a Cervical Cancer Screening Option among Women Living with HIV in Rural Uganda.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Trends and Racial/Ethnic Differences in Predictors of Cervical Cancer Screening among US Women Ages 30-64 Years.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023Article
- Ensuring a Successful Transition From Cytology to Human Papillomavirus-Based Primary Cervical Cancer Screening in Canada by Investigating the Psychosocial Correlates of Women's Intentions: Protocol for an Observational Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Cervical cancer screening compliance among active duty service members in the US military.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Cervical cancer screening using HPV tests on self-samples: attitudes and preferences of women participating in the VALHUDES study.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2021Article
- Cervical cancer and screening: knowledge, awareness and attitudes of women in Malta.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2020Article
- A novel speculum-free imaging strategy for visualization of the internal female lower reproductive system.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to identify possible barriers to and facilitators of cervical cancer screening by (a) estimating time and travel costs and other direct non-medical costs incurred in attending clinic-based cervical cancer screening, (b) investigating screening compliance and reasons for noncompliance, (c) determining women's knowledge of human papillomavirus (HPV), its relationship to cervical cancer, and HPV and cervical cancer prevention, and (d) investigating correlates of HPV knowledge and screening compliance. MATERIALS AND
methods1510 women attending the clinic-based cervical cancer screening program in Stockholm, Sweden were included. Data on sociodemographic characteristics, time and travel costs and other direct non-medical costs incurred in attending (e.g., indirect cost of time needed for the screening visit, transportation costs, child care costs, etc.), mode(s) of travel, time, distance, companion's attendance, HPV knowledge, and screening compliance were obtained via self-administered questionnaire.
resultsFew respondents had low socioeconomic status. Mean total time and travel costs and direct non-medical cost per attendance, including companion (if any) were €55.6. Over half (53%) of the respondents took time off work to attend screening (mean time 147 minutes). A large portion (44%) of the respondents were noncompliant (i.e., did not attend screening within 1 year of the initial invitation), 51% of whom stated difficulties in taking time off work. 64% of all respondents knew that HPV vaccination was available; only 34% knew it was important to continue to attend screening following vaccination. Age, education, and income were the most important correlates of HPV knowledge and compliance; and additional factors associated with compliance were time off work, accompanying companion and HPV knowledge.
conclusionTime and travel costs and other direct non-medical costs for clinic-based screening can be considerable, may affect the cost-effectiveness of a screening program, and may constitute barriers to screening while HPV knowledge may facilitate compliance with screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.