Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31718646›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Health system constraints affecting treatment and care among women with cervical cancer in Harare, Zimbabwe.

O Tapera, G Dreyer, W Kadzatsa, A M Nyakabau, B Stray-Pedersen, Hendricks Sjh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Health system constraints in cervical cancer prevention in rural Namibia: A qualitative study.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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.

O TaperaSchool of Health Systems and Public Health, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa. oscar.tapera@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5916-4745
G DreyerGynaecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
W KadzatsaParirenyatwa Group of Hospitals, Radiotherapy Centre, Harare, Zimbabwe.
A M NyakabauParirenyatwa Group of Hospitals, Radiotherapy Centre, Harare, Zimbabwe.
B Stray-PedersenInstitute of Clinical Medicine, University in Oslo and Womens' Clinic, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Hendricks SjhFaculty of Dentistry and Oral Health Hospital, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among women yet access to treatment and care remains a huge challenge in Zimbabwe. The objective of this study was to investigate health system constraints affecting engagement into treatment and care by women with cervical cancer in Harare, Zimbabwe.

methodsA sequential explanatory mixed methods design was used for this study. Phase 1 comprised of two surveys namely: patient and health worker surveys with sample sizes of 134 and 78 participants respectively. Validated structured questionnaires programmed in Android tablet with SurveytoGo software were used for data collection during the surveys. Univariate analyses were conducted using STATA® version 14 to generate descriptive statistics. In phase 2, 16 in-depth interviews, 20 key informant interviews and 6 focus groups were conducted to explain survey results. Participants were purposively selected and sample sizes were informed by saturation principle. Participants in phase 1 and 2 were different. English transcripts were manually coded line by line in Dedoose software using the thematic codes that had been established from the survey data. The final codes were used to support and explain the survey data at the interpretation stages.

resultsHealth system constraints identified in surveys were: limited or lack of training for health workers, weakness of surveillance system for cervical cancer, limited access to treatment and care, inadequate health workers, reliance of patients on out-of-pocket funding for treatment services, lack of back-up for major equipment. Qualitative inquiry revealed the following barriers to treatment and care: high costs of treatment and care, lack of knowledge about cervical cancer and bad attitudes of health workers, few screening and treating centres located mostly in urban areas, lack of clear referral system resulting in bureaucratic processes, and limited screening and treating capacities in health facilities due to lack of resources.

conclusionThe results of this study show that health system and its organization present barriers to access of cervical cancer treatment and care among women. Strong political will, mobilization of resources both domestically and from partners in addition to sound policies are imperative to address key health system challenges.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityAdultDelivery of Health CareFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMedical AssistanceMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesUterine Cervical NeoplasmsYoung AdultZimbabweAccessCervical cancerConstraintsHarareHealth systemPoliciesSequential explanatory mixed methodsTreatment and care

Identifiers

PMID31718646
PMCPMC6852958

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.