ArticlePreventive medicine reports2022
Qualitative factors influencing breast and cervical cancer screening in women: A scoping review.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gender-based differences in colorectal cancer screening uptake in Singapore: a cross-sectional study.Family practice · 2026Article
- Phenomenological study of the lived experiences of pregnant women following the diagnosis of fetal abnormalities in the second half of pregnancy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Caring for the caregivers: breast and cervical cancer screening among informal caregivers of cancer patients - a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Innovative Treatment for Cervical Precancer: A Qualitative Evaluation using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.Global implementation research and applications · 2026Article
- Precision theranostics in cervical Cancer: Harnessing stimuli-responsive hydrogels for tumor microenvironment-targeted therapy and diagnosis.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Contemporary Status and Frontiers of Cervical Cancer Screening in the United States.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Review
- Factors Determining Women's Attitudes and Knowledge Toward Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Gynaecological oncology services: A qualitative exploration of womens' perspectives at a teaching hospital in North East India.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- Social influences on Moroccan and Pakistani immigrant women's access and use of cervical cancer screening in Catalonia, Spain: a social network analysis.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Breast cancer screening coverage is severely reduced among women who reside in segregated areas: a cross-sectional investigation in Hungary.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Towards elimination of cervical cancer - human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and cervical cancer screening in Asian National Cancer Centers Alliance (ANCCA) member countries.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Review
- Understanding Barriers and Facilitators of Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening among Singapore Women: A Qualitative Approach.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2023Article
- Breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of a decision aid on mammography screening uptake: study protocol.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast and cervical are top cancers for women globally, but few studies have summarised how gender norms influence screening uptake, given sexual connotations and physical exposure. These beliefs may play a central role in decision-making, and understanding them is crucial to improving screening rates and services. This review scopes international literature for gender-based qualitative factors influencing women's screening uptake. A systematic search of peer-reviewed English articles in PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL was conducted from inception until December 2019. Articles were included if they were about breast or cervical cancer screening, had mixed or qualitative methodology, and sampled women from the general population. 72 studies spanning 34 countries were analysed. Eight studies also included healthcare providers' views. Our narrative thematic analysis summarised primary themes extracted from each study into first-level subthemes, then synthesising second-level and third-level themes: (I) gender socialisation of women, (II) gender inequality in society, and (III) lack of empowerment to women in making screening decisions. Women tended to face sociocultural/role-based constraints, were expected to prioritise family, and keep bodily exposure to their husbands. Women showed low awareness and had fewer opportunities for health education compared to men. Male relations were often gatekeepers to financial resources needed to pay for screening tests. Screening risked community norms about women's or husbands' perceived embarrassing sexual behaviours. These findings suggest that interventions targeting unhelpful stigmatising beliefs about women's cancer screening must concurrently address community general norms, familial role-based beliefs, as well as at male relations who hold the purse-strings.
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.