Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35436908›Full record

ArticleBMC women's health2022

Uptake and correlates of cervical cancer screening among women attending a community-based multi-disease health campaign in Kenya.

Yujung Choi, Saduma Ibrahim, Lawrence P Park, Craig R Cohen, Elizabeth A Bukusi, Megan J Huchko

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Yujung ChoiDuke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. yujung.choi@duke.edu.
Saduma IbrahimKenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Lawrence P ParkDuke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Craig R CohenDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Elizabeth A BukusiKenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Megan J HuchkoDuke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Duke University · USKenya Medical Research Institute · KEDuke Institute for Health Innovation · USIbis Reproductive Health · US

Funding

Social and Behavioral Sciences CoreP30AI064518 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Nwora Lance Okeke · 2005 to 2026
$50.5M
The role of HIF2alpha in colon carcinogenesisR01CA148828 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI SHAH, YATRIK M · 2010 to 2025
$5.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA148828NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI064518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite the increased risk of cervical cancer among HIV-positive women, many HIV-care programs do not offer integrated cervical cancer screening. Incorporating self-collected Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing into HIV programs is a potential strategy to identify women at higher risk for cervical cancer while leveraging the staffing, infrastructure and referral systems for existing services. Community-based HIV and HPV testing has been effective and efficient when offered in single-disease settings.

methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted within a community outreach and multi-disease screening campaigns organized by the Family AIDS Care and Education Services in Kisumu County, Kenya. In addition to HIV testing, the campaigns provided screening for TB, malaria, hypertension, diabetes, and referrals for voluntary medical male circumcision. After these services, women aged 25-65 were offered self-collected HPV testing. Rates and predictors of cervical cancer screening uptake and of HPV positivity were analyzed using tabular analysis and Fisher's Exact Test. Logistic regression was performed to explore multivariate associations with screening uptake.

resultsAmong the 2016 women of screening age who attended the outreach campaigns, 749 women (35.6%) were screened, and 134 women (18.7%) were HPV-positive. In bivariate analysis, women who had no children (p < 0.01), who were not pregnant (p < 0.01), who were using contraceptives (p < 0.01), who had sex without using condoms (p < 0.05), and who were encouraged by a family member other than their spouse (p < 0.01), were more likely to undergo screening. On multivariable analysis, characteristics associated with higher screening uptake included: women aged 45-54 (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.05-2.52) compared to women aged 25-34; no children (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.06-2.56); and family support other than their spouse (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.09-2.16). Women who were pregnant were 0.44 times (95% CI 0.25-0.76) less likely to get screened. Bivariate analyses with participant characteristics and HPV positivity found that women who screened HPV-positive were more likely to be HIV-positive (p < 0.001) and single (p < 0.001).

conclusionsThe low screening uptake may be attributed to implementation challenges including long waiting times for service at the campaign and delays in procuring HPV test kits. However, given the potential benefits of integrating HPV testing into HIV outreach campaigns, these challenges should be examined to develop more effective multi-disease outreach interventions.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsPapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHealth PromotionHumansKenyaMaleMass ScreeningPapillomaviridaePregnancy

Identifiers

PMID35436908
PMCPMC9014598
OpenAlexW4224083452

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.