Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33566798›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Beliefs and perceptions regarding cervical cancer and screening associated with Pap smear uptake in Johannesburg: A cross-sectional study.

Mantwa Chisale Mabotja, Jonathan Levin, Mary Kawonga

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mantwa Chisale MabotjaSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-4324-3515
Jonathan LevinSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Mary KawongaSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
University of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical cancer is a major global public health concern, with 85% of cases occurring in low- and middle-income countries. In South Africa, it is the second most common cancer amongst women. Screening and treatment of cervical cancer precursor lesions is associated with a lower incidence and mortality. This research determines the associations between women's beliefs about cervical cancer and screening and the uptake of Papanicolaou (Pap) smears in Johannesburg, where cervical screening uptake is suboptimal.

methodsThis research was approved by the University of Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (Medical), clearance certificate number: M170243 and the Johannesburg District Heath Research Committee prior to conducting the study. All participants signed a consent form prior to participating in this study. This cross-sectional analytical study used an interviewer-administered validated measurement scale based on the Health Belief Model (HBM) to describe health beliefs regarding cervical cancer and screening among 280 women aged 30 years and older, attending Johannesburg primary care facilities in 2017. Logistic regression models, with robust estimation of variance to account for clustering of women within clinics, were fitted to identify health beliefs (perceived susceptibility, severity, barriers and benefit, cues to action, and self-efficacy) associated with ever having had a Pap smear (screening uptake), while controlling for knowledge of screening and potential confounders.

resultsOf the 280 women, 177 (63.2%) had ever been screened, 180 (64.3%) were never married, 199 (71.1%) attained secondary education and 133 (47.5%) were employed full time. Women of older age (AOR = 1.6 for a 5-year increase in age; CI: 1.3-1.9; P<0.001), with higher knowledge scores (AOR = 2.5 for a 5-point increase in knowledge score; 95% CI:1.0-6.3;P = 0.051), with lower perceived barriers scores (AOR = 0.4 for a 5-point increase in barriers score; 95% CI:0.3-0.5; P<0.001) and higher perceived severity scores (AOR = 1.3 for a 5-point increase in severity score; 95% CI:1.0-1.6; P = 0.017) were more likely to have had a Pap smear.

conclusionsThis study shows that women who take up screening are older, more knowledgeable regarding cervical cancer and screening, less likely to perceive screening barriers, and more likely to perceive cervical cancer as a severe disease. This highlights that for public health interventions to increase screening uptake, the focus should include tailored behaviour change communication strategies that address women's beliefs regarding screening barriers and emphasize the severity of cervical cancer.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsSouth AfricaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVaginal Smears

Identifiers

PMID33566798
PMCPMC7875386
OpenAlexW3126624898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.