ArticleBMC international health and human rights2020
Universal cervical cancer control through a right to health lens: refocusing national policy and programmes on underserved women.
Article in BMC international health and human rights, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global determinants of cervical cancer outcomes: a health systems analysis.BMJ oncology · 2026Article
- Evaluation and Recommendations to Modernize Cervical Cancer Detection and Prevention Programs in Brazil: Challenges and Opportunities - A Narrative Review.Acta cytologica · 2026Review
- Article
- "Barriers and Advantages of Self-Sampling Tests, for HPV Diagnosis: A Qualitative Field Experience Before Implementation in a Rural Community in Ecuador".International journal of women's health · 2024Article
- Article
- Implementation of HPV Tests in Latin America: What We Learned; What Should We Have Learned, and What Can We Do Better?Cancers · 2022Review
- Cervical cancer screening programme attendance and compliance predictors regarding Colombia's Amazon region.PloS one · 2022Article
- Understanding Cervical Cancer Screening Barriers among Migrant Women: A Qualitative Study with Healthcare and Community Workers in Portugal.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Establishing women's cancer care services in a fragile, conflict and violence affected ecosystem in Africa.Ecancermedicalscience · 2021Article
- Assessing the Acceptability of a Vaginal Self-Sampling Device in a Rural Parish of Cuenca, Ecuador.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCervical cancer claims 311,000 lives annually, and 90% of these deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Cervical cancer is a highly preventable and treatable disease, if detected through screening at an early stage. Governments have a responsibility to screen women for precancerous cervical lesions. Yet, national screening programmes overlook many poor women and those marginalised in society. Under-screened women (called hard-to-reach) experience a higher incidence of cervical cancer and elevated mortality rates compared to regularly-screened women. Such inequalities deprive hard-to-reach women of the full enjoyment of their right to sexual and reproductive health, as laid out in Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and General Comment No. 22. DISCUSSION: This article argues first for tailored and innovative national cervical cancer screening programmes (NCSP) grounded in human rights law, to close the disparity between women who are afforded screening and those who are not. Second, acknowledging socioeconomic disparities requires governments to adopt and refine universal cancer control through NCSPs aligned with human rights duties, including to reach all eligible women. Commonly reported- and chronically under-addressed- screening disparities relate to the availability of sufficient health facilities and human resources (example from Kenya), the physical accessibility of health services for rural and remote populations (example from Brazil), and the accessibility of information sensitive to cultural, ethnic, and linguistic barriers (example from Ecuador). Third, governments can adopt new technologies to overcome individual and structural barriers to cervical cancer screening. National cervical cancer screening programmes should tailor screening methods to under-screened women, bearing in mind that eliminating systemic discrimination may require committing greater resources to traditionally neglected groups.
conclusionGovernments have human rights obligations to refocus screening policies and programmes on women who are disproportionately affected by discrimination that impairs their full enjoyment of the right to sexual and reproductive health. National cervical cancer screening programmes that keep the right to health principles (above) central will be able to expand screening among low-income, isolated and other marginalised populations, but also women in general, who, for a variety of reasons, do not visit healthcare providers for regular screenings.
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.