ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2017
Cancer screening in Portugal: sex differences in prevalence, awareness of organized programmes and perception of benefits and adverse effects.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Breast Cancer Screening Programmes across the WHO European Region: Differences among Countries Based on National Income Level.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017Pooled it
- Prostate cancer treatment in Portugal: a nationwide analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Assessing the Level of Knowledge and Experience Regarding Cervical Cancer Prevention and Screening among Roma Women in Romania.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Article
- Factors Associated with the Use of Fecal Immunochemical Tests and Colonoscopy in the INSEF Portuguese Population.Portuguese journal of public health · 2021Article
- Viewpoints of the target population regarding barriers and facilitators of colorectal cancer screening in the Czech Republic.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening Programs in Europe: The Transition Towards HPV Vaccination and Population-Based HPV Testing.Viruses · 2018Review
- Awareness of Patients and Relatives about Breast Cancer in Turkey.Iranian journal of public health · 2018Article
- Prostate cancer characteristics: A descriptive analysis of clinical features at presentation in the last decade in a black African community.Annals of African medicineArticle
- Regular physical activity-related awareness and knowledge in Portugal: results from a population-based survey.Porto biomedical journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer screening has contributed to downward trends in cancer mortality, but is also associated with adverse effects, which highlights the importance of promoting the participation based on informed decisions.
objectivesWe aimed to describe the use of cancer screening (either in organized programmes or as opportunistic screening), awareness of organized programmes and perception of its potential benefits and adverse effects, depicting possible sex differences. DESIGN AND
methodsWe evaluated 1624 Portuguese-speaking dwellers, aged between 16 and 79 years, through face-to-face interviews. To quantify sex differences, adjusted prevalence ratios and respective 95% confidence intervals were computed using Poisson regression.
resultsAmong eligible age groups, the lifetime prevalence of screening for breast and cervical cancers was 89.8 and 71.9%, respectively. The prevalence was 23.7% for colorectal cancer and no significant sex differences were observed. Prostate cancer screening was reported by 63.8% of men. Over half of the participants referred that cancers such as prostate, skin, lung and stomach should be screened for, in addition to those for which organized programmes are recommended. Reassurance by negative results was identified as the main potential benefit of screening by nearly one-third of men and women. Anxiety while waiting for results was the most mentioned potential adverse effect (60.4%); men refer less often this and financial costs, although statistical significance of these results was borderline.
conclusionsThis study provides a benchmark to plan and monitor the effects of awareness-raising interventions, as well as for international comparisons across countries with different cancer prevention and control structures.
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.