SynthesisBMC women's health2021
Barriers and facilitators for cervical cancer screening among adolescents and young people: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC women's health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 5 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health system barriers and facilitators influencing the uptake of cervical cancer screening among women in sub-Saharan Africa: systematic review and meta-synthesis.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators of pap-smear test uptake in Asia: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Barriers to breast and cervical cancer screening uptake among Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic women in the United Kingdom: evidence from a mixed-methods systematic review.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Identifying the key barriers, facilitators and factors associated with cervical cancer screening attendance in young women: A systematic review.Women's health (London, England)Pooled it
- Perceived effectiveness of messages to address cervical cancer screening barriers: An online experiment.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Knowledge about cervical cancer in young Portuguese women: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Trial
- Psychosocial predictors of cervical cancer screening intention among female teachers in Karaj, Iran: An integrated behavioral model.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening Preferences in Transgender, Nonbinary, and Gender-diverse Patients.O&G open · 2026Article
- Colorectal cancer screening awareness among rural populations in Northern China.BMC public health · 2026Observational
- Challenges of scaling up cervical cancer screening in Ethiopia: a qualitative socio-ecological study.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Reduced age-wise disparity in estimated cervical cancer screening participation rates after applying hysterectomy correction: a population-based cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Effect of a culturally tailored educational intervention on women's knowledge and attitudes toward cervical cancer screening: a single-group pre-post study.Women's health nursing (Seoul, Korea) · 2026Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening Prevalence and Predictors Among Women Aged 25-49 Years in Ghana: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Reproductive Health in Young and Adolescent Females with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Current gastroenterology reports · 2026Review
- Barriers and facilitators to a combined strategy of HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening among Mexican women.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Low participation in cancer screening in India: a scoping review of breast and cervical cancer programs.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Assessment of barriers to cervical cancer screening at primary health care centers in Makurdi, North-Central Nigeria: a mixed-methods study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Trends in uptake of cancer screening among people with severe mental illness before and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: A repeated cross-sectional study.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025Article
- Exploring the barriers to cervical screening and perspectives on new self-sampling methods amongst under-served groups.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThough cervical cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death globally, its incidence is nearly entirely preventable. Young people have been an international priority for screening as this population has historically been under-screened. However, in both high-income and low-income countries, young people have not been screened appropriately according to country-specific guidelines. The aim of this systematic review was to systematically characterize the existing literature on barriers and facilitators for cervical cancer screening (CCS) among adolescents and young people globally.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines of three key databases: Medline-OVID, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Supplementary searches were done through ClinicialTrials.Gov and Scopus. Databases were examined from 1946 until the date of our literature searches on March 12th 2020. We only examined original, peer-reviewed literature. Articles were excluded if they did not specifically discuss CCS, were not specific to individuals under the age of 35, or did not report outcomes or evaluation. All screening, extraction, and synthesis was completed in duplicate with two independent reviewers. Outcomes were summarized descriptively. Risk of bias for individual studies was graded using an adapted rating scale based on the Risk of Bias Instrument for Cross-Sectional Surveys of Attitudes and Practices.
resultsOf the 2177 original database citations, we included 36 studies that met inclusion criteria. The 36 studies included a total of 14,362 participants, and around half (17/36, 47.2%) of studies specifically targeted students. The majority of studies (31/36, 86.1%) discussed barriers and facilitators to Pap testing specifically, while one study analyzed self-sampling (1/36, 2.8%), one study targeted HPV DNA testing (1/36, 2.8%), and the remainder (4/36, 11.1%) were not specified. Our systematic review found that there are three large categories of barriers for young people: lack of knowledge/awareness, negative perceptions of the test, and systemic barriers to testing. Facilitators included stronger relationships with healthcare providers, social norms, support from family, and self-efficacy.
conclusionThere are unique barriers and facilitators that affect CCS rates in adolescents and young people. Health systems and healthcare providers worldwide should address the challenges for this unique population.
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.