Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35305588›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Recruitment strategies to promote uptake of cervical cancer screening in the West Region of Cameroon.

Marie-Anne Pham, Khadidja Benkortbi, Bruno Kenfack, Eveline Tincho Foguem, Jessica Sormani, Ania Wisniak, Sophie Lemoupa Makajio, Engelbert Manga, Pierre Vassilakos, Patrick Petignat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

10 authors.

Marie-Anne Pham *Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. hienanh.marieanne.pham@gmail.com.
Khadidja Benkortbi *Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Bruno KenfackFaculty of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Dschang, Dschang, Cameroon.
Eveline Tincho FoguemDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Biyem-Assi District Hospital, Yaoundé, Cameroon.
Jessica SormaniGynecology Division, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Ania WisniakGynecology Division, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Sophie Lemoupa MakajioGynecology Division, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Engelbert MangaHelp and Reintegration Center for Disabled Youth, Obala, Cameroon.
Pierre VassilakosGynecology Division, Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Patrick PetignatFaculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe World Health Organization's (WHO) global strategy for cervical cancer elimination has set the target of 70% of women screened in all countries by 2030. Community sensitization through media is often used, but community health workers' (CHW) involvement may contribute to improving screening coverage. We aimed to assess effectiveness and costs of two cervical cancer screening recruitment strategies conducted in a low-resource setting.

methodsThe study was conducted in the West Region of Cameroon, in the Health District of Dschang, a community of 300,000 inhabitants. From September 2018 to February 2020, we recruited and screened women for cervical cancer in a single-visit prevention campaign at Dschang District Hospital. During the first 9 months, recruitment was only based on Community Information Channels (CIC) (e.g.. street banners). From the tenth month, participation of CHW was added in the community after training for cervical cancer prevention counselling. Population recruitment was compared between the two strategies by assessing the number of recruited women and direct costs (CHW costs included recruitment, teaching, certification, identification badge, flyers, transport, and incentives). The intervention's cost-effectiveness was expressed using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: During the period under study, 1940 women were recruited, HPV positive rate was 18.6% (n = 361) and 39 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) were diagnosed. Among included participants, 69.9% (n = 1356) of women were recruited through CIC as compared to 30.1% (n = 584) by CHW. The cost per screened woman and CIN2+ diagnosed was higher in the CHW group. The ICER was 6.45 USD or 16.612021Int'l$ per screened woman recruited by CHW. Recruitment in rural areas increased from 12.1 to 61.4% of all women included between CIC-led and CHW-led interventions. These outcomes highlight the importance of training, preparing, and deploying CHW to screen hard-to-reach women, considering that up to 45% of Cameroon's population lives in rural areas.

conclusionCHW offer an important complement to CIC for expanding coverage in a sub-Saharan African region such as the West Region of Cameroon. CHW play a central role in building awareness and motivation for cervical cancer screening in rural settings.

Indexed as

Papillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCameroonCommunity Health WorkersEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningCervical cancer screeningCommunity health workersCost-effectivenessRecruitment strategies

Identifiers

PMID35305588
PMCPMC8933918

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.