Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29272293›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Perceived cervical cancer risk among women treated for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: The importance of specific knowledge.

Sonia Andersson, Karen Belkić, Selin Safer Demirbüker, Miriam Mints, Ellinor Östensson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. 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 · 2021
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

5 authors.

Sonia AnderssonDepartment of Children's and Women's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska University Hospital-Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karen BelkićDepartment of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Selin Safer DemirbükerDepartment of Children's and Women's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska University Hospital-Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Miriam MintsDepartment of Children's and Women's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska University Hospital-Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ellinor ÖstenssonDepartment of Children's and Women's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska University Hospital-Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0668-088X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWomen with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) are at increased risk for developing cervical cancer. We examine how women with high-grade CIN perceive their own risk, and about pertinent knowledge concerning human high-risk papillomavirus (HPV), CIN and cervical cancer.

methodsAll patients who underwent first-time treatment of high-grade CIN (grade 2+) were followed-up at 6-months at the Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden and were invited to participate in the present study. This included completion of a questionnaire examining sociodemographic characteristics, self-perceived risk of cervical cancer without regular gynecologic follow-up, and 14 queries about HPV, CIN and cervical cancer knowledge, inter alia.

resultsThe participation rate was 96.6%, with 479 women enrolled in this study. Over 75% were age 40 or younger, over half had completed university education. Most were married or co-living with their partner and were gainfully employed. On a scale scored from 10 (highest self-perceived risk of cervical cancer without regular gynecologic follow-up) to 1 (lowest self-perceived risk), 64% rated their risk ≥ 7; almost 30% viewed their risk ≤ 6 and 7.5% did not rate their risk. A Specific Knowledge Scale with six of the queries explained 58.3% of the total variance. Nearly 30% of the women answered four or fewer of the six queries correctly. The Specific Knowledge Scale predicted self-perceived cervical cancer risk (Odds ratio = 11.3, 95% Confidence Interval 5.6 - 22.6) after adjusting for age, income and education. Most of the women with low self-perceived cervical cancer risk did not rate their HPV-related knowledge as good. However, 32 predominantly university-educated women, with low self-perceived cervical cancer risk, considered their HPV-related knowledge good.

conclusionIt is vital to effectively convey accurate information about these patients' cervical cancer risk, needed preventive and follow-up measures, together with the relevant specific knowledge, for these women at increased risk for developing cervical cancer. Tailored programming to address these knowledge gaps is needed.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAlphapapillomavirusFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentSelf-AssessmentUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29272293
PMCPMC5741232

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.