ArticlePloS one2017
Determinants of a GP visit and cervical cancer screening examination in Great Britain.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Maternal Cervical Cancer Screening Adherence with Adolescent HPV Vaccination Among Adolescent-Mother Pairs.Journal of community health · 2024Article
- Socioeconomic and cultural factors associated with pap smear screening among French women living in Réunion Island.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Non-use and inadequate use of cervical cancer screening among a representative sample of women in the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Lack of Awareness, Body Confidence and Connotations of Sex: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of Barriers Affecting the Decision to Attend Initial Cervical Cancer Screening.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2023Article
- Associations between the signing status of family doctor contract services and cervical cancer screening behaviors: a cross-sectional study in Shenzhen, China.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Screening participation after a false positive result in organized cervical cancer screening: a nationwide register-based cohort study.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Demand for Cervical Cancer Screening in Tigray Region of Ethiopia in 2018: A Community-Based Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of women's health · 2020Article
- Usefulness Analysis of Urine Samples for Early Screening of Human Papilloma Virus Infection.Journal of cancer prevention · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn the UK, women are requested to attend a cervical cancer test every 3 years as part of the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. This analysis compares the determinants of a cervical cancer screening examination with the determinants of a GP visit in the same year and investigates if cervical cancer screening participation is more likely for women who visit their GP.
methodsA recursive probit model was used to analyse the determinants of GP visits and cervical cancer screening examinations. GP visits were considered to be endogenous in the cervical cancer screening examination. The analysed sample consisted of 52,551 observations from 8,386 women of the British Household Panel Survey.
resultsThe analysis showed that a higher education level and a worsening self-perceived health status increased the probability of a GP visit, whereas smoking decreased the probability of a GP visit. GP visits enhanced the uptake of a cervical cancer screening examination in the same period. The only variables which had the same positive effect on both dependent variables were higher education and living with a partner. The probability of a cervical cancer screening examination increased also with previous cervical cancer screening examinations and being in the recommended age groups. All other variables had different results for the uptake of a GP visit or a cervical cancer screening examination.
conclusionsMost of the determinants of visiting a GP and cervical cancer screening examination differ from each other and a GP visit enhances the uptake of a smear test.
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.