Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29351597›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of public health2018

A systematic review of health promotion interventions to increase breast cancer screening uptake: from the last 12 years.

Feleke Doyore Agide, Roya Sadeghi, Gholamreza Garmaroudi, Bereket Molla Tigabu

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Assessing the Effectiveness of Cancer Screening Interventions Targeting Appalachian Populations: A Systematic Review.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2021
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Kin KeeperJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Feleke Doyore AgideDepartment of Health Education and Promotion, School of Public Health, International Campus, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Roya SadeghiDepartment of Health Education and Promotion, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran.
Gholamreza GarmaroudiDepartment of Health Education and Promotion, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran.
Bereket Molla TigabuDepartment of Pharmaco-economics and Pharmaceutical Administration, International Campus, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The outcome of breast cancer treatment largely depends on the timing of detection. The health promotion interventions have an immense contribution to early detection and improved survival. Therefore, this review aimed to provide evidence on the efficacy of the health promotion interventions to increase the uptake of breast cancer screening and to develop effective interventions targeting women. Methods: Online databases (PubMed/MEDLINE/PubMed Central, Ovid/MEDILINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published between January 2005 and January 2017. A quality coding system was assessed using Cochrane checklists for randomized controlled trial (RCT) and Downs and Black checklists for non-RCT. The score was rated for the included articles by each researcher independently and the average score is given accordingly. This study was registered in PROSPERO as [PROSPERO 2017: CRD42017060488]. Results: The review dovetailed 22 studies. Thirteen studies (59.10%) were conducted in the Unite States, 4 in Iran (18.18%), 2 in India (9.09%) and 1 each in Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel. The interventions were classified as 'individual-based', 'community-based', 'group-based teachings and training' and 'behavioral model based'. The majority of the studies showed favorable outcomes after health promotion interventions, including improvements in women's view of breast screening, breast self-examination and knowledge of breast screening. Conclusion: The review confirmed that most of the health promotion interventions targeting women boosted the breast screening in one or another way. However, the limited quality of the included studies showed that further research is needed to improve the trials in the next future.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerHealth PromotionPatient Acceptance of Health CareBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansIndiaIranIsraelMass ScreeningTurkey

Identifiers

PMID29351597
PMCPMC6241206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.