Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30616579›Full record

ArticleBMC women's health2019

Exploring the feasibility of using mobile phones to improve the management of clients with cervical cancer precursor lesions.

Jennifer Moodley, Deborah Constant, Matthys H Botha, Frederick H van der Merwe, Amanda Edwards, Mariette Momberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC women's health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
15.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer MoodleyCancer Research Initiative, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Anzio Road, Observatory, Cape Town, 7925, South Africa. Jennifer.moodley@uct.ac.za.ORCID 0000-0002-9398-5202
Deborah ConstantWomen's Health Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Anzio Road. Observatory, Cape Town, 7925, South Africa.
Matthys H BothaUnit for Gynaecological Oncology, Tygerberg Academic Hospital and Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
Frederick H van der MerweUnit for Gynaecological Oncology, Tygerberg Academic Hospital and Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
Amanda EdwardsCancer Research Initiative, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Anzio Road, Observatory, Cape Town, 7925, South Africa.
Mariette MombergWomen's Health Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Anzio Road. Observatory, Cape Town, 7925, South Africa.
University of Cape Town · ZAStellenbosch University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer screening programs hold much potential for reducing the cervical cancer disease burden in developing countries. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of mobile health (mHealth) phone technology to improve management and follow-up of clients with cervical cancer precursor lesions.

methodsA sequential mixed methods design was employed for this study. Quantitative data was collected using a cross-sectional survey of 364 women eligible for a Pap smear at public sector health services in Cape Town, South Africa. Information was collected on socio-demographic status; cell phone ownership and patterns of use; knowledge of cervical cancer prevention; and interest in Pap smear results and appointment reminders via SMS-text messages. Descriptive statistics, crude bivariate comparisons and logistic regression models were employed to analyze survey results. Qualitative data was collected through 10 in-depth interviews with primary health care providers and managers involved in cervical cancer screening. Four focus group discussions with 27 women attending a tertiary level colposcopy clinic were also conducted. Themes related to loss of mobile phones, privacy and confidentiality, interest in receiving SMS-text messages, text language and clinic-based management of a SMS system are discussed. Thematic analyses of qualitative data complemented quantitative findings.

resultsPhone ownership amongst surveyed women was 98% with phones mostly used for calls and short message service (SMS) functions. Over half (58%) of women reported loss/theft of mobile phones. Overall, there was interest in SMS interventions for receiving Pap smear results and appointment reminders. Reasons for interest, articulated by both providers and clients, included convenience, cost and time-saving benefits and benefits of not taking time off work. However, concerns were expressed around confidentiality of SMS messages, loss/theft of mobile phones, receiving negative results via SMS and accessibility/clarity of language used to convey messages. Responsibility for the management of a clinic-based SMS system was also raised.

conclusionsResults indicated interest and potential for mHealth interventions in improving follow-up and management of clients with abnormal Pap smears. Health system and privacy issues will need to be addressed for mHealth to achieve this potential. Next steps include piloting of specific SMS messages to test feasibility and acceptability in this setting.

Indexed as

Reminder SystemsAdultCell PhoneEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPapanicolaou TestPrecancerous ConditionsTelemedicineText MessagingUterine Cervical NeoplasmsYoung AdultCervical cancerColposcopyeHealthLoss to follow-upmHealthPap smearPreventionScreening

Identifiers

PMID30616579
PMCPMC6322222
OpenAlexW2909993835

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.