ArticleAmerican journal of health promotion : AJHP2020
Effectiveness of a Kansas City, Jail-Based Intervention to Improve Cervical Health Literacy and Screening, One-Year Post-Intervention.
Article in American journal of health promotion : AJHP, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Social determinants of health and US cancer screening interventions: A systematic review.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansPooled it
- Gynecologic conditions in the context of incarceration: A scoping review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Challenges and Opportunities in Cancer Screening in Incarcerated Populations.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2025Article
- RISE-Vac-Co-production of Vaccine Education Materials with Persons Living in Prison.Emerging infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Interventions to improve the implementation of evidence-based healthcare in prisons: a scoping review.Health & justice · 2023Article
- Case example of a jail-based cancer prevention clinical trial: Social determinants of health framework, novel experimental design, and retention strategies to facilitate long-term follow-up of clinical trial participants.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- HPV Vaccination and Cervical Cancer Screening: Assessing Awareness, Attitudes, and Adherence in Detained Women.Vaccines · 2022Article
- Cervical Dysplasia and Treatments Barrier in Jail: A Study in Marseille's Detention Center-Les Baumettes, France.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Managing Technology, Content, and User Experience: An mHealth Intervention to Improve Women's Health Literacy after Incarceration.Journal of health care for the poor and underserved · 2021Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess effectiveness, 1-year post-intervention, of a program delivered in jails with women to improve cervical health literacy (CHL) and up-to-date Papanicolaou (Pap) screening.
designPre-post design to evaluate Pap screening and CHL effects 1 year after our original randomized wait-list control study.
settingSurveys conducted in Kansas City, 2015 to 2017 (baseline in 2014).
participantsAdult women (n = 133).
interventionOne-week (10-contact-hour), small-group, CHL program. MEASURES: Surveys to assess CHL components and up-to-date Pap screening. ANALYSIS: χ
results73% (133/182) women retained at 1-year. From pre-intervention, 6 of 8 CHL components improved (.01 >
conclusionA brief intervention to promote cervical health literacy, delivered with women during a jail detention, can lead to sustained improvements in CHL and prevention practices.
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.