Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35010314›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Exploring Factors Associated with Patients Who Prefer Clinician-Sampling to HPV Self-Sampling: A Study Conducted in a Low-Resource Setting.

Jessica Sormani, Bruno Kenfack, Ania Wisniak, Alida Moukam Datchoua, Sophie Lemoupa Makajio, Nicole C Schmidt, Pierre Vassilakos, Patrick Petignat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors Regarding HPV Vaccination and Self-Sampling Among US Young Adults.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    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

8 authors.

Jessica SormaniGynaecology Division, Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7111-3975
Bruno KenfackDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Dschang, Dschang, Cameroon.
Ania WisniakGynaecology Division, Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland.
Alida Moukam DatchouaDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, District Hospital of Dschang, Dschang, Cameroon.
Sophie Lemoupa MakajioGynaecology Division, Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland.
Nicole C SchmidtGynaecology Division, Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland.
Pierre VassilakosGynaecology Division, Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0926-4366
Patrick PetignatGynaecology Division, Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6835-533X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling (Self-HPV) is a promising strategy to improve cervical cancer screening coverage in low-income countries. However, issues associated with women who prefer conventional HPV clinical-sampling over HPV self-sampling may affect screening participation. To address this issue, our study assessed factors associated with women's preferences related to Self-HPV. This study was embedded in a large clinical trial recruiting women aged 30-49 years in a primary HPV-based study termed "3T-Approach" (for Test-Triage-Treatment), launched in 2018 at Dschang District Hospital, West Cameroon. Participants were invited to perform a Self-HPV. After the sampling and before receiving the results, participants completed a questionnaire about cervical cancer screening and their preferences and perceptions around Self-HPV. The median age of the 2201 participants was 40.6 (IQR 35-45) years. Most (1693 (76.9%)) preferred HPV self-sampling or had no preference for either method, and 508 (23.1%) preferred clinician-sampling. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of reporting a clinician-sampling preference were tertiary educational level (29.4% CI: 25.6-33.6 vs. 14.4% CI: 12.8-16.1) and being an employee with higher grade professional or managerial occupations (5.5% CI: 3.8-7.9 vs. 2.7% CI: 2.0-3.5). The main reported reason for women preferring clinician-sampling was a lack of "self-expertise". Most women (>99%) would agree to repeat HPV self-sampling and would recommend it to their relatives. HPV self-sampling in the cultural context of central Africa was well accepted by participants, but some participants would prefer to undergo clinician sampling. Health systems should support well-educated women to increase self-confidence in using HPV self-sampling.

Indexed as

AlphapapillomavirusPapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaeSelf CareSpecimen Handlingcervical cancer screeningHPV self-samplingpreferencesub-Saharan Africa

Identifiers

PMID35010314
PMCPMC8744711

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.