Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34313402›Full record

SynthesisCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2022

Factors influencing cervical cancer screening practice among female health workers in Nigeria: A systematic review.

Elvis Anyaehiechukwu Okolie, Debra Barker, Lawrence Achilles Nnyanzi, Seun Anjorin, David Aluga, Blessing Ifeoma Nwadike

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.6field-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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Elvis Anyaehiechukwu OkolieSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2283-8077
Debra BarkerSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Lawrence Achilles NnyanziSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Seun AnjorinDivision of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
David AlugaSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Blessing Ifeoma NwadikeDepartment of Microbiology, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Teesside University · GBUniversity of Ibadan · NGUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical cancer is the most prevalent gynaecologic cancer in Nigeria. Despite being largely preventable through screening, cervical cancer is the second leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality in Nigeria. To reduce the burden of cervical cancer in Nigeria, female health workers (FHWs) are expected to play an influential role in leading screening uptake and promoting access to cervical cancer education and screening.

aimThe aim of this systematic review is to assess the factors influencing cervical cancer screening (CCS) practice among FHWs in Nigeria.

methodsWe conducted a systematic literature search across six (6) electronic databases namely MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, African Index Medicus, CINAHL, and Web of Science between May 2020 and October 2020. Reference list and grey literature search were conducted to complement database search. Four reviewers screened 3171 citations against the inclusion criteria and critically appraised the quality of eligible studies. Narrative synthesis was used in summarising data from included studies.

resultsOverall, 15 studies met the inclusion criteria and were all quantitative cross-sectional studies. Included studies sampled a total of 3392 FHWs in Nigeria. FHWs had a high level of knowledge and positive attitude towards CCS. However, CCS uptake was poor. Predominant barriers to CCS uptake were the cost of screening, fear of positive results, lack of test awareness, reluctance to screen, low-risk perception, and lack of time. In contrast, being married, increasing age, awareness of screening methods, and physician recommendation were the most documented facilitators.

conclusionThis study revealed that a complex interplay of socioeconomic, structural, and individual factors influences CCS among FHWs in Nigeria. Therefore, implementing holistic interventions targeting both health system factors such as cost of screening and infrastructure and individual factors such as low-risk perception and fear of positive result affecting FHWs in Nigeria is critical to reducing the burden of cervical cancer.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMass ScreeningNigeriacancer screeningcervical cancerfemale health workersNigeria

Identifiers

PMID34313402
PMCPMC9124499
OpenAlexW3185098705

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.