ArticleArchives of clinical and biomedical research2022
Barriers to the Cervical Cancer Screening by CPC-28 Questionnaire: A Pilot Study.
Article in Archives of clinical and biomedical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this study was to identify and compare barriers to cervical cancer screening (CCS) between women seeking and not seeking CCS by CPC-28 questionnaire ('Creencias, Papanicolaou, Cancer-28' questionnaire - Beliefs about Papanicolaou and Cervical Cancer). Methods: A pilot study was performed in 20 gynecological departments, each department sending data from five healthy women and five untreated women with cervical cancer. The women completed a validated and standardized questionnaire with 28 statements (the CPC-28 questionnaire). The participants were divided into women not seeking CCS (8 healthy women vs 30 women with cervical cancer) and women seeking CCS (54 healthy women vs 43 women with cervical cancer). A four-point Likert scale (item score from 1 to 4) was used to assess responses. A linear transformation was made to calculate the responses. Differences with a p value of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The women not seeking CCS vs those seeking CCS had higher barriers according to Domain 1 of the CPC-28 (median; interquartile range: 33.33; 28.70-40.74 vs 14.82; 7.41-29.63; p<0.001). The risk of not seeking CCS was statistically significant in non-working (OR; 95 % CI: 2.458; 1.127-5.358; p<0.024), non-childbearing women (OR; 95 % CI: 3.302; 1.421-7.671; p<0.006) and women without cervical cancer (OR; 95 % CI: 4.709; 1.960-11.317; p<0.001). Conclusions: We identified barriers to having a Pap test in both of our groups. The risk of not seeking the CCS was statistically significant in non-working, non-childbearing women and women without cervical cancer.
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.