Trial reportTrials2022
Impact of health education intervention on demand of women for cervical cancer screening: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 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.
- Effect of Health Education on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake and Knowledge among Target Women in Addis Ababa: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding cancer screening among adults in primary care.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Facilitators and Barriers to Cervical Cancer Screening Among Women in a Rural District of Northeastern Uganda, a Qualitative Study.Cancer management and research · 2026Article
- Interventions to Improve the Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening with Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid: A Scoping Review.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025Article
- Awareness of cervical cancer risk factors and preventive approaches, and perceived causes of cervical cancer among secondary school girls: a cross-sectional study in Northern Uganda.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- Evaluation of follow-up colposcopy procedures after abnormal cervical screening result across a statewide study in Mississippi.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2024Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Follow-up Colposcopy Procedures After Abnormal Cervical Screening Result Across a Statewide Study in Mississippi.Research square · 2024Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening in Uganda: Determinants of Past Screening and Post-Education Uptake; A Cross-Sectional Survey.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical cancer is considered preventable disease, though it is the second largest killer of women's cancer in low and middle-income countries. Despite the government's attempts to broaden screening facilities, the screening service utilization was poor. Our study evaluated the impact of health education intervention on women's demand for cervical cancer screening.
methodsCommunity-based cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted in thirty district towns as clusters in Tigray region, Ethiopia. A total of 700 women aged 20 to 60 years were recruited for both groups using simple random sampling from April to July, 2018. After baseline data collection, health education intervention was given to the intervention group by trained health professionals using power point presentation and peer group discussion at the nearest health institution. The health education was given for three days followed by subsequent consultations for 6 months. The outcome variable was demand of women for cervical cancer screening. The intent-to-treat and per-protocol analysis were considered to evaluate the inflation of the loss to follow-up on effect size. Chi-square test was used to assess the difference of variables between control and intervention groups at baseline data. Finally, difference in difference analysis was used to see the true effect of the intervention on outcome variable.
resultsA total of 674 participants (340 in intervention and 334 in control groups) were able to complete the follow-up, making a response rate of 96.3%. At baseline, the differences in proportion of all outcome variables in control and intervention groups were not statistically significant. After follow-up, a statistically significant difference between control and intervention groups was observed in the proportion of willingness to screen (p value = 0.000), having plan to screen (p value = 0.000), ever screened (p value = 0.000), and the overall demand for cervical cancer screening (p value = 0.000). Finally, the impact of intervention was explained by the difference in differences in the proportion of willingness to screen (36.6%) (p value < 0.000), having plan to screen (14.6%) (p value < 0.000), ever screened (16.9%) (p value < 0.000), and overall demand for cervical cancer screening (36.9%) (p value < 0.000).
conclusionThis study revealed that health education intervention could increase in overall demand of women for cervical cancer screening. Thus, it would be helpful to consider health education in health planning and service provision.
trial registrationThe registration number is PACTR201808126223676; date registered: 23 April 2018, and the type is "retrospectively registered."
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.