ArticleBMC cancer2020
A nationally quasi-experimental study to assess the impact of partial organized breast and cervical cancer screening programme on participation and inequalities.
Article in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Facilitators and barriers to the decision-making of breast cancer screening in female residents in Mainland China: a systematic literature review.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of public health interventions to address breast cancer inequalities in low- and middle-income countries.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Lifetime prevalence and adherence rate of cervical cancer screening among women living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Pooled it
- Healthcare Utilization and Inequalities in Breast Cancer Early Detection Behaviors Among Women in Türkiye: A Nationally Representative Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Performance of a Full-Coverage Cervical Cancer Screening Program Using on an Artificial Intelligence- and Cloud-Based Diagnostic System: Observational Study of an Ultralarge Population.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Observational
- National age-specific mortality trends for cervical and breast cancers in urban-rural areas of China from 2009 to 2021: a population-based analysis.Military Medical Research · 2024Article
- Status quo and problem analysis of cervical cancer screening program in China: Based on RE-AIM framework.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Organized Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening: Attendance and Determinants in Southern Italy.Cancers · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOrganized breast and cervical cancer screening programme could only provide services at no cost for a fraction of socioeconomic-deprived women in China and other low-resource countries, however, little evidence exists for whether such a programme effectively affect the participation and inequalities at the population level.
methodsWe used individual-level data from a nationally cross-sectional survey in 2014-2015 for breast and cervical cancer screening participation. Data for intervention and comparison grouping were from 2009 to 2014 national breast and cervical cancer screening programme, and counties covered by the programme were divided into intervention group. We assessed the impact of the intervention on the participation rates and the magnitude of inequalities with two approaches: multivariable multilevel logistic regressions adjusting for individual- and region-level covariates; and a difference analysis combined with propensity score matching that estimated the average intervention effect.
resultsOf 69,875 included women aged 35-64 years, 21,620 were classified into the intervention group and 43,669 into the comparison group for breast cancer screening; and 31,794 into the intervention group, and 33,682 into the comparison group for cervical cancer screening. Participation rate was higher in intervention group than comparison group for breast cancer screening (25.3, 95% confidential interval [CI], 22.8-27.7%, vs 19.1, 17.4-20.7%), and cervical cancer screening (25.7, 23.8-27.7%, vs 21.5, 19.6-23.5%), respectively. Intervention significantly increased the likelihood of participation for both breast cancer and cervical cancer screening in overall women, rural women and urban women, whereas the effect was significantly higher in rural women than urban women. The average intervention effect on the participation rate was an increase of 7.5% (6.7-8.2%) for breast cancer screening, and 6.8% (6.1-7.5%) for cervical cancer screening, respectively. The inequalities were significantly decreased by 37-41% (P < 0.001) between rural and urban, however, were slightly decreased or even increased in terms of age, education status, and household income.
conclusionsOrganized breast and cervical cancer screening programme targeting for a fraction of women could increase the participation rates at population level, however, it could not significantly affect socioeconomic-introduced inequalities. Further studies are need to conduct time-series analyses and strengthen the causal correlation.
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.