ArticleBMC public health2020
Never and under cervical cancer screening in Switzerland and Belgium: trends and inequalities.
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 21 papers, 2 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Risk of cervical cancer and high-grade lesions in vulnerable women a systematic review and meta-analysis.Nature communications · 2026Pooled 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
- The line is drawn, the fate is cast: urban-rural inequalities in the timing of initial health check-ups in China.Frontiers in sociology · 2026Article
- Women's compliance with cervical cancer screening recommendations and associated barriers to participation: A cross-sectional analysis.PloS one · 2026Article
- 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
- Barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening among under- and neverscreened women in Flanders, Belgium - a qualitative study on community and healthcare providers' perspectives.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Inequalities in patients' experiences with cancer care: the role of economic and health literacy determinants.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Socioeconomic disparities in Papanicolaou test utilization in Western Iran.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Association of Regular Cervical Cancer Screening with Socioeconomic, COVID-19 Infection and Vaccine Status Among Japanese Population: Cohort Observational Study.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Interventions to Improve Endoscopic Screening Adherence of Cancer in High-Risk Populations: A Scoping Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Cervical cancer (over-)screening in Europe: Balancing organised and opportunistic programmes.Scandinavian journal of public health · 2023Article
- Effect of Test History at Ages 50-64 on Later Cervical Cancer Risk: A Population-based Case-control Study.Cancer research communications · 2023Article
- Article
- The Practice and Willingness of Women Towards Opportunistic Screening for Breast and Cervical Cancers in Sichuan Province, China: A Cross-Sectional Study.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2023Article
- Papanicolaou test in Brazil: analysis of the National Health Survey of 2013 and 2019.Revista de saude publica · 2023Article
- Barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening among under-screened women in Cuenca, Ecuador: the perspectives of women and health professionals.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Harms and benefits of cervical cancer screening among non-attenders in Switzerland: The transition towards HPV-based screening.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Cervical Cancer Prophylaxis-State-of-the-Art and Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Does the socioeconomic status predict health service utilization in persons with enhanced health care needs? Results from a population-based survey in persons with spinal cord lesions from Switzerland.International journal for equity in health · 2022Article
- Revisiting the Effects of Organized Mammography Programs on Inequalities in Breast Screening Uptake: A Multilevel Analysis of Nationwide Data From 1997 to 2017.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResearch on inequalities in cervical cancer screening (CCS) participation has overlooked the distinction between 'never-' and 'under-screeners' while different socioeconomic and demographic determinants may underlie 'non-' and 'under-' screening participation. This study examines socioeconomic and demographic inequalities in never and under CCS participation. We compare cross-national prevalence and trends among these two groups in Switzerland and Belgium, two countries with similar opportunistic CCS strategy but different healthcare systems.
methodsData on 38,806 women aged 20-70 from the Swiss Health Interview Survey (1992-2012) and 19,019 women aged 25-64 from the Belgian Health Interview Survey (1997-2013), both population-based cross-sectional nationally representative surveys, was analysed. Weighted adjusted prevalence ratios were estimated with multivariate Poisson regressions.
resultsOver the studied period, never screening prevalence was about 15% in both Switzerland and Belgium and under screening prevalence about 14.0%. Socioeconomic gradients were found among both never- and under-screeners. Higher income women had lower never and under screening prevalence in Switzerland and a similar gradient in education was observed in Belgium. Importantly, distinct socioeconomic and demographic determinants were found to underlie never and under screening participation. Never screening was significantly higher among foreign nationals in both countries and this association was not observed in under screening. Never screening prevalence was lower among older age groups, while under screening increased with older age. Over time, age inequalities diminished among never- and under- screeners in Switzerland while educational inequalities increased among never-screeners in Belgium.
conclusionFindings revealed that determinants of screening inequalities differed among never- and under-screeners and hence these should be addressed with different public health strategies. Crucially, socioeconomic and demographic inequalities were more pronounced among never-screeners who appeared to face more structural and persistent inequalities. Differences between the two countries should also be noted. The more liberal-type Swiss healthcare systems appeared to shape income-related screening inequalities, while education appeared to be a stronger determinant of never- and under-screening in Belgium.
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.