ArticleJMIR cancer2019
A Thematic Analysis of Attitudes Toward Changes to Cervical Screening in Australia.
Article in JMIR cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Acceptability of risk stratification within population-based cancer screening from the perspective of the general public: A mixed-methods systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Transitioning from Cytology to HPV Test-Based Primary Cervical Screening in Canada: A Population-Based Survey of Women's Screening and Information Preferences.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Risk-based innovations in cancer screening and diagnosis: a discrete choice experiment to explore priorities of the UK public.BMJ open · 2025Article
- On the path toward cervical cancer elimination in Canada: a national survey of factors influencing women's intentions to participate in human papillomavirus test-based primary cervical screening.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2024Article
- Understanding the Challenges of HPV-Based Cervical Screening: Development and Validation of HPV Testing and Self-Sampling Attitudes and Beliefs Scales.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- "A lot can happen in five years": Women's attitudes to extending cervical screening intervals.European journal of cancer care · 2022Article
- Acceptability of extending HPV-based cervical screening intervals from 3 to 5 years: an interview study with women in England.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Reasons behind Low Cervical Screening Uptake among South Asian Immigrant Women: A Qualitative Exploration.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Assessing Canadian women's preferences for cervical cancer screening: A brief report.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Web-Based Health Information Following the Renewal of the Cervical Screening Program in Australia: Evaluation of Readability, Understandability, and Credibility.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn December 2017, the Australian National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) was changed to encompass a 5-yearly human papillomavirus (HPV) primary test for women aged 25 to 74 years. Public concerns about changes to screening programs has been demonstrated in other countries previously.
objectiveThe aim of the study was to explore in depth women's understanding of and concerns about the specific changes to the Australian NCSP implemented in December 2017.
methodsA Web-based petition (Change.org) opposing the changes received over 70,000 signatures and nearly 20,000 comments from February to March 2017. Of 19,633 comments, a random sample of 10% (2000/19,633) were analyzed using content analysis (reported elsewhere). Comments relating directly to the specific changes to the program were further analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis.
resultsAround one-third (34.55%; 691/2000) of the total comments were related to concerns about specific changes to the program. The greatest concern was that screening intervals would be too long and that cancer may not be detected in time for successful treatment. Missing cancer in younger women (aged <25 years) was also an important concern, perceiving younger women to remain at significant risk. Notably, concern was rarely expressed about the new test (the HPV test).
conclusionsGaps in knowledge and understanding about changes to the program and the rationale behind these have caused health concerns among women. Worry about the extended screening interval indicates little understanding of the slow progression of the HPV infection to cervical cancer or the high rates of regression. Identification of these knowledge gaps can inform both deintensification of other cancer screening programs and practitioners, so that they are able to address these concerns with their patients.
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.