Trial reportCancer causes & control : CCC2022
Impact of an educational tool on young women's knowledge of cervical cancer screening recommendations.
Trial report in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions in Primary Care to Improve Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Can ChatGPT Provide Patient-Friendly and Reliable Information on Cervical Cancer Screening? A Study of ChatGPT-Generated Information in Polish.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- A Proposed mHealth Intervention to Address Patient Barriers to Colposcopy Attendance: Qualitative Interview Study of Clinic Staff and Patient Perspectives.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake Among Women with Disabilities: Findings from a Cross-Sectional Study in Chile.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Integrating Care Coordination and Mental Health Research Into Dialysis Practice: Stakeholder Perspectives, Methods, and Outcomes.Kidney medicine · 2023Article
- Confusion and anxiety in between abnormal cervical cancer screening results and colposcopy: "The land of the unknown".Patient education and counseling · 2023Article
- Identification and Validation of the Anoikis-Related Gene Signature as a Novel Prognostic Model for Cervical Squamous Cell Carcinoma, Endocervical Adenocarcinoma, and Revelation Immune Infiltration.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Text Messaging as a Tool to Address Language Barriers in Cervical Cancer Screening Among Spanish-Preferred Populations: A Quality Improvement Study.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
- Improving cervical cancer health literacy in Arabic-speaking immigrant women in the United States through an online patient education tool.Women's health (London, England)Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCurrent cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend 3-year screening intervals, in contrast to the previous recommendation of annual screening, to prevent over screening and overtreatment. We evaluated the impact of viewing a tablet-based educational tool prior to seeing a clinician on young women's knowledge and understanding of cervical cancer screening, HPV vaccination follow-up of abnormal pap smears, and comfort in communicating with their providers.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was part of a cluster-randomized study of fourteen primary care clinics from January 2015 to December 2016. We developed the cervical cancer education tool in English and Spanish using a community-based approach that included formative work and cognitive interviewing. Clinics were randomized to use the intervention (tablet-based patient education tool) or to participate as a control group. We administered surveys to a convenience sample of 229 English- or Spanish-speaking women aged 19 to 35 years in these clinics. We used descriptive analyses and logistic regression models with cluster-robust standard errors to compare differences among the two groups.
resultsCompared to women seen in control clinics, women seen in intervention clinics demonstrated greater knowledge regarding human papilloma virus (HPV (p = 0.004) and understanding (p < 0.001) of cervical cancer screening. Comfort in communicating with providers was not statistically different (p = 0.053). Women in the intervention group felt that the tool helped them understand that an abnormal Pap smear does not require immediate treatment (61.5%).
conclusionInnovative online patient education that is offered prior to patients' interaction with their clinicians can improve their knowledge about cervical cancer prevention and treatment.
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.