Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34530761›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2021

Cervical cancer screening "see and treat approach": real-life uptake after invitation and associated factors at health facilities in Gondar, Northwest Ethiopia.

Alemnew Destaw, Miresa Midaksa, Adamu Addissie, Eva Johanna Kantelhardt, Muluken Gizaw

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Alemnew DestawDepartment of epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of public health, College of Medicine and Health Science, Mizan-Tepi University, Mizan-Teferi, Ethiopia.
Miresa MidaksaAddis Ababa Food, Medicine and Health Care Administration and Control Authority, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Adamu AddissieDepartment of Preventive medicine, Addis Ababa University, School of Public Health, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Eva Johanna KantelhardtInstitute for Medical Epidemiology, Biometrics and Informatics Martin-Luther-University, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany. eva.kantelhardt@uk-halle.de.
Muluken GizawDepartment of Preventive medicine, Addis Ababa University, School of Public Health, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. muluken.gizaw@yahoo.com.
Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg · DEAddis Ababa City Administration Health Bureau · ETAddis Ababa University · ETMizan Tepi University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough cervical cancer is a preventable disease, screening coverage in Ethiopia is far below the target. There is limited evidence on uptake among the general population in Ethiopia. Thus, this study was conducted to assess uptake and associated factors with the cervical cancer screening "see and treat approach" among eligible women in public health facilities in Gondar town, Northwest Ethiopia.

methodA facility-based, cross-sectional study was conducted. The total sample size was 493. A consecutive sampling method was applied. Participants were informed about and invited to cervical cancer screening using visual inspection with acetic acid. Crude and adjusted odds ratios were calculated to determine statistical association with socio-demographic variables. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors of cervical cancer screening uptake.

resultOut of 464 women advised for screening, 76 (16.4, 95% CI [13, 19.8%]) attended the screening. Primary education and above (AOR = 5.3, 95% CI [2.20, 13.0]), knowledge about the disease (AOR = 8.4, 95% CI [3.33, 21.21]), perceived susceptibility (AOR = 6.5, 95% CI [2.72, 15.51]), fewer perceived barriers (AOR = 6.4, 95% CI [2.30, 17.80]), cues to action (AOR = 4.6, 95% CI [1.86, 11.32]), perceived self-efficacy (AOR = 5, 95% CI [2.14, 11.73]), and previous recommendation for screening (AOR = 2.7, 95% CI [1.15, 6.51]) were significantly associated with screening uptake.

conclusionThe actual uptake of screening offered in this study was high relative to only 3% national screening coverage. There is a need to implement active invitation for screening with special focus on less-educated women. Repeated invitation may facilitate future screening uptake.

Indexed as

Program EvaluationAcetic AcidAdultCommunity Health CentersCounselingCryotherapyDiagnostic Techniques, Obstetrical and GynecologicalDisease SusceptibilityEarly Detection of CancerEducational StatusEthiopiaFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansIndicators and ReagentsMiddle AgedAcetic AcidIndicators and ReagentsCervical cancerEthiopiaScreening uptakeVIA approach

Identifiers

PMID34530761
PMCPMC8444493
OpenAlexW3133232160

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.