Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36129898›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Cervical cancer management in Zimbabwe (2019-2020).

Petmore Zibako, Nomsa Tsikai, Sarah Manyame, Themba G Ginindza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

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

4 authors.

Petmore ZibakoDiscipline of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-2868-7882
Nomsa TsikaiCollege of Health Sciences, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Sarah ManyameCollege of Health Sciences, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Themba G GinindzaCancer & Infectious Diseases Epidemiology Research Unit (CIDERU), College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-0993-8308

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobally, cervical cancer is the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer amongst women, and it is especially common in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The aim of the study was to determine the current patterns and characteristics of CC management in Zimbabwe in the HIV pandemic era, including the knowledge, attitude and practice of patience.

methodsThe study was a mixed method which incorporated a cross-sectional survey of 408 CC patients which was conducted from October 2019 to September 2020 using an interviewer administered paper questionnaire. The study was conducted at Parirenyatwa hospital, the only cancer treating public health facility in Harare, Zimbabwe. Differences in study outcome by categorical variables were assessed using the Person Chi-square (χ2) test. Odds ratios (unadjusted and adjusted) and 95%CIs for potential risk factors associated with the outcome were estimated using logistic regression model.

resultsFrom a total of 408 CC patients recruited into the study no prevention mechanism was available or known to these patients and only 13% knew that CC is caused by Human papillomavirus. Only 87 (21%) had ever been screened for CC and 83 (97%) of those who had been screened had the visual inspection with acetic acid procedure done. Prevention (screening uptake) is statistically high among the educated (with secondary education OR = 9.497, 95%CI: 2.349-38.390; with tertiary OR = 59.381, 95%CI: 11.937-295.380). Late presentation varied statistically significantly with marital status (high among the divorced, OR = 2.866; 95% CI: 1.549-5.305 and widowed OR = 1.997; 95% CI: 1.112-3.587), was low among the educated (Tertiary OR = .393; 95% CI: .166-.934), low among those living in the rural (OR = .613; 95% CI: .375-.987), high among those with higher parity OR = 1.294; 95% CI: 1.163-1.439). Less than 1% of the patients had surgery done as a means of treatment. Radiotherapy was administered to 350 (86%) of the patients compared to chemotherapy administered to 155 (38%). A total of 350 (86%) have failed to take medication due to its unavailability, while 344 (85%) missed taking medication due to unaffordability. Complementary and alternative medicines were utilized by 235 (58%). Majority, 278 (68%) were HIV positive, mainly pronounced within age (36-49 years OR = 12.673; 95% CI: 2.110-76.137), among those with higher education (secondary education OR = 4.981; 95%CI: 1.394-17.802 and in those with no co-morbidities (893.956; 95%CI: 129.611-6165.810).

conclusionCC management was inadequate from prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment and palliative care hence there is need to improve CC management in Zimbabwe if morbidity and mortality are to be reduced to acceptable levels. Education helped improve prevention, but reduces chances of diagnosis, working as a doubled edged sword in CC management Prevention was high among the educated. Those in rural areas experience poor CC management. It should be noted that general education is good; however it must be complimented by CC awareness to improve CC management outcomes holistically. Cervical cancer management services need to be decentralized so that those in rural areas have easy access. Given that those with co-morbidities and high parity have better CC management, CC services need to be tied to co-morbidity and antenatal/post-natal care and management services.

Indexed as

Uterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaePregnancyZimbabwe

Identifiers

PMID36129898
PMCPMC9491541

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.