ArticlePloS one2017
Knowledge about human papillomavirus and prevention of cervical cancer among women of Arkhangelsk, Northwest Russia.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices among Women of Reproductive Age on Human Papillomavirus Infection, Cervical Cancer and Vaccination in Otukpo, Nigeria.Ethiopian journal of health sciences · 2024Article
- Survey on cervical cancer knowledge and its influencing factors among 2,578 women in Shache county, Kashi, China.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Cervical cancer screening programme attendance and compliance predictors regarding Colombia's Amazon region.PloS one · 2022Article
- Saudi Women's Knowledge and Attitude toward Cervical Cancer Screening, Treatment, and Prevention: A Cross-Sectional Study in Qassim Region (2018-2019).Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019Article
- Sociodemographic characteristics, sexual behaviour and knowledge about cervical cancer prevention as risk factors for high-risk human papillomavirus infection in Arkhangelsk, North-West Russia.International journal of circumpolar health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKnowledge about cervical cancer (CC) risk factors and benefits of CC prevention motivates women to participate in its screening. However, several studies show that there is a significant knowledge deficit worldwide about human papillomavirus (HPV). The current study explores the level of knowledge about HPV and CC prevention in the context of sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics of women who visited an antenatal clinic in Arkhangelsk, Russia.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted in the city of Arkhangelsk, which seats the administrative center of Arkhangelsk County, Northwest Russia. It included women who consulted a gynecologist for any reason between January 1, 2015 and April 30, 2015, were residents of Arkhangelsk, 25 to 65 years of age and sexually active (N = 300). Student's t-test for continuous variables and Pearson's χ2 test for categorical variables were used in the comparisons of women grouped as having either poor or sufficient knowledge. Linear regression analysis was also employed.
resultsThe level of knowledge about HPV and CC prevention was associated with education, parity, age of initiating of intercourse, and sources of information. After adjustment, women with university education were more likely to have higher knowledge about HPV and CC prevention compared to those with lower education.
conclusionsWe observed that most participants had a sufficient level of knowledge. Educational gaps were identified that potentially could be used to tailor interventions in CC prevention.
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.