Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29035163›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2017

Uptake and correlates of cervical cancer screening among HIV-infected women attending HIV care in Uganda.

Rhoda K Wanyenze, John Baptist Bwanika, Jolly Beyeza-Kashesya, Shaban Mugerwa, Jim Arinaitwe, Joseph K B Matovu, Violet Gwokyalya, Dickson Kasozi, Justine Bukenya, Fred Makumbi

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

Article in Global health action, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rhoda K Wanyenzea Department of Disease Control and Environmental Health, Makerere University School of Public Health , Kampala , Uganda.
John Baptist Bwanikab Department of Epidemiology and Statistics , Makerere University School of Public Health , Kampala , Uganda.
Jolly Beyeza-Kashesyab Department of Epidemiology and Statistics , Makerere University School of Public Health , Kampala , Uganda.
Shaban Mugerwac AIDS Control Program, Ministry of Health , Kampala , Uganda.
Jim Arinaitwed Global Fund Focal Coordination Office, Ministry of Health , Kampala , Uganda.
Joseph K B Matovue Department of Community Health, Makerere University School of Public Health , Kampala , Uganda.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6480-2940
Violet Gwokyalyaa Department of Disease Control and Environmental Health, Makerere University School of Public Health , Kampala , Uganda.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2982-4658
Dickson Kasozia Department of Disease Control and Environmental Health, Makerere University School of Public Health , Kampala , Uganda.
Justine Bukenyaa Department of Disease Control and Environmental Health, Makerere University School of Public Health , Kampala , Uganda.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9139-6183
Fred Makumbib Department of Epidemiology and Statistics , Makerere University School of Public Health , Kampala , Uganda.
Makerere University · UGMinistry of Health · UG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected women are at high risk of cervical cancer.

objectiveThis study assessed uptake and correlates of cervical screening among HIV-infected women in care in Uganda.

methodsA nationally representative cross-sectional survey of HIV-infected women in care was conducted from August to November 2016. Structured interviews were conducted with 5198 women aged 15-49 years, from 245 HIV clinics. Knowledge and uptake of cervical screening and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination were determined. Correlates of cervical screening were assessed with modified Poisson regression to obtain prevalence ratios (PRs) using Stata version 12.0.

resultsOverall, 94.0% (n = 4858) had ever heard of cervical screening and 66% (n = 3732) knew a screening site. However, 47.4% (n = 2302) did not know the schedule for screening and 50% (n = 2409) did not know the symptoms of cervical cancer. One-third (33.7%; n = 1719) rated their risk of cervical cancer as low. Uptake of screening was 30.3% (n = 1561). Women who had never been screened cited lack of information (29.6%; n = 1059) and no time (25.5%; n = 913) as the main reasons. Increased likelihood of screening was associated with receipt of HIV care at a level II health center [adj. PR 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-2.76] and private facilities (adj. PR 1.68, 95% CI 1.16-3.21), knowledge of cervical screening (adj. PR 2.19, 95% CI 1.78-2.70), where to go for screening (adj. PR 6.47, 95% CI 3.69-11.36), and low perception of risk (adj. PR 1.52, 95% CI 1.14-2.03). HPV vaccination was 2%.

conclusionsCervical screening and HPV vaccination uptake were very low among HIV-infected women in care in Uganda. Improved knowledge of cervical screening schedules and sites, and addressing fears and risk perception may increase uptake of cervical screening in this vulnerable population.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPrevalenceUgandaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsYoung AdultCervical cancercervical cancer screeningHIV-infected women

Identifiers

PMID29035163
PMCPMC5678455
OpenAlexW2765443109

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.