Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33533501›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2021

Cross-sectional survey of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening programs in selected low- and middle-income countries: Study from the IARC COVID-19 impact study group.

Patricia Villain, Andre L Carvalho, Eric Lucas, Isabel Mosquera, Li Zhang, Richard Muwonge, Farida Selmouni, Catherine Sauvaget, Partha Basu, IARC COVID-19 Impact Study Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Occupational Cancer Mortality Trends in Brazil, 1990-2023.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Patricia VillainInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Andre L CarvalhoInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Eric LucasInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Isabel MosqueraInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Li ZhangInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Richard MuwongeInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Farida SelmouniInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Catherine SauvagetInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Partha BasuInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0003-0124-4050
IARC COVID-19 Impact Study Group

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We conducted a study to document the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening continuum in selected low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). LMICs having an operational cancer control plan committed to screen eligible individuals were selected. Managers/supervisors of cancer screening programs were invited to participate in an online survey and subsequent in-depth interview. Managers/supervisors from 18 programs in 17 countries participated. Lockdown was imposed in all countries except Brazil. Screening was suspended for at least 30 days in 13 countries, while diagnostic-services for screen-positives were suspended in 9 countries. All countries except Cameroon, Bangladesh, India, Honduras and China managed to continue with cancer treatment throughout the outbreak. The participants rated service availability compared to pre-COVID days on a scale of 0 (no activities) to 100 (same as before). A rating of ≤50 was given for screening services by 61.1%, diagnostic services by 44.4% and treatment services by 22.2% participants. At least 70% participants strongly agreed that increased noncompliance of screen-positive individuals and staff being overloaded or overwhelmed with backlogs would deeply impact screening programs in the next 6 months at least. Although many of the LMICs were deficient in following the "best practices" to minimize service disruptions, at least some of them made significant efforts to improve screening participation, treatment compliance and program organization. A well-coordinated effort is needed to reinitiate screening services in the LMICs, starting with a situational analysis. Innovative strategies adopted by the programs to keep services on-track should be mutually shared.

Indexed as

BangladeshBrazilCameroonChinaCommunicable Disease ControlCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesDeveloping CountriesEarly Detection of CancerHondurasHumansIndiaNeoplasmsPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnairescancer screeningCOVID-19low- and middle-income countries

Identifiers

PMID33533501
PMCPMC8014228

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.