ArticleBMC public health2020
Utilization of cervical cancer screening among migrants and non-migrants in Germany: results from a large-scale population survey.
Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uptake of cervical cancer screening and its associated factors in Africa: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Comparing cancer stage at diagnosis between migrants and non-migrants: a meta-analysis.British journal of cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Barriers to cancer screening uptake and approaches to overcome them: a systematic literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening among underserved women in Europe.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Pooled it
- 'What would happen if I die in a foreign country?': Cancer-related personal uncertainty and its implications for health equity among Indonesian migrant domestic workers.International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Understanding cancer screening participation patterns among first-generation migrants in Germany: a typology based on the intersections of hindering and facilitating factors.International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Participation in cervical cancer screening among migrants and non-migrants in primary healthcare in Lisbon: a register-based study.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Underuse, overuse, and guideline-based use of cervical cancer screening: social disparities in temporal screening trajectories in the French CONSTANCES cohort.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Review
- Social influences on Moroccan and Pakistani immigrant women's access and use of cervical cancer screening in Catalonia, Spain: a social network analysis.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Exploring cervical cancer screening awareness, beliefs, barriers, and practices among indonesian muslim women in Japan: a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Integrated cervical cancer screening uptake and associated factors among women attending primary care services at public health centres in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a multicentre cross-sectional study.BMJ public health · 2024Article
- Population-based age- and type-specific prevalence of human papillomavirus among non-vaccinated women aged 30 years and above in Germany.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Migration background and use of preventive healthcare services: Findings of the German Ageing Survey.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Looking Back, Moving Forward: Challenges and Opportunities for Global Cervical Cancer Prevention and Control.Viruses · 2024Review
- Stakeholder perceptions of cervical screening accessibility and attendance in Ireland: a qualitative study.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Participatory development of a manual for the implementation of diversity-sensitive palliative and hospice care in Germany: a mixed-methods study protocol.BMC palliative care · 2023Article
- Survey of current policies towards widening cervical screening coverage among vulnerable women in 22 European countries.European journal of public health · 2023Article
- Assessment of health literacy among migrant populations in Southern Spain: A cross-sectional study.Nursing open · 2023Article
- What is the role of attitudinal barriers on cervical cancer screening non-attendance? Findings from a cross-sectional study with migrant women in Portugal.BMC women's health · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies from European and non-European countries have shown that migrants utilize cervical cancer screening less often than non-migrants. Findings from Germany are inconsistent. This can be explained by several limitations of existing investigations, comprising residual confounding and data which is restricted to only some regions of the country. Using data from a large-scale and nationwide population survey and applying the Andersen Model of Health Services Use as the theoretical framework, the aim of the present study was to examine the role that different predisposing, enabling and need factors have for the participation of migrant and non-migrant women in cervical cancer screening in Germany.
methodsWe used data from the 'German Health Update 2014/2015' survey on n = 12,064 women ≥20 years of age. The outcome of interest was the participation in cancer screening (at least once in lifetime vs. no participation). The outcome was compared between the three population groups of non-migrants, migrants from EU countries and migrants from non-EU countries. We employed multivariable logistic regression to examine the role of predisposing, enabling and need factors.
resultsNon-EU and EU migrant women reported a lower utilization of cervical cancer screening (50.1 and 52.7%, respectively) than non-migrant women (57.2%). The differences also remained evident after adjustment for predisposing, enabling and need factors. The respective adjusted odds ratios (OR) for non-EU and EU migrants were OR = 0.67 (95%-CI = 0.55-0.81) and OR = 0.80 (95%-CI = 0.66-0.97), respectively. Differences between migrants and non-migrants were particularly pronounced for younger age groups. Self-rated health was associated with participation in screening only in non-migrants, with a poorer health being indicative of a low participation in cancer screening.
conclusionsThe disparities identified are in line with findings from studies conducted in other countries and are indicative of different obstacles this population group encounters in the health system. Implementing patient-oriented health care through diversity-sensitive health services is necessary to support informed decision-making.
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.