Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36476609›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2022

Social network-based group intervention to promote uptake of cervical cancer screening in Uganda: study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial.

Rhoda K Wanyenze, Joseph K B Matovu, Kathryn Bouskill, Margrethe Juncker, Eve Namisango, Sylvia Nakami, Jolly Beyeza-Kashesya, Emmanuel Luyirika, Glenn J Wagner

Registry-linked trialAbstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04960748 (Pilot of a Network-driven, Advocacy Intervention to Promote Cervical Cancer Screening in Uganda), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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.

NCT04960748 phase2completednot on this map

Pilot of a Network-driven, Advocacy Intervention to Promote Cervical Cancer Screening in Uganda

TypeinterventionalSponsorRANDRan2021 to 2022Enrolled143ConditionsCervical Cancer PreventionArmsWOMEN FIGHTING TO STOP CERVICAL CANCER
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

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

9 authors.

Rhoda K WanyenzeSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, 7072, Uganda. rwanyenze@musph.ac.ug.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5864-3314
Joseph K B MatovuSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, 7072, Uganda.
Kathryn BouskillRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Margrethe JunckerRays of Hope Hospice Jinja, Jinja, Uganda.
Eve NamisangoAfrican Palliative Care Association, Kampala, Uganda.
Sylvia NakamiRays of Hope Hospice Jinja, Jinja, Uganda.
Jolly Beyeza-KashesyaMulago Specialized Women and Neonatal Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.
Emmanuel LuyirikaAfrican Palliative Care Association, Kampala, Uganda.
Glenn J WagnerRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.

Funding

Pilot of a network-driven, advocacy intervention to promote cervical cancer screening in UgandaR21TW011728 · FIC · MAKERERE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF HEALTH SCIENCES · PI WANYENZE, RHODA KITTI · 2020 to 2021
$396k
FIC NIH HHS R21 TW011728
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCervical cancer (CC) is the most common cancer and accounts for one quarter of all cancer-related deaths among women in Uganda, where lifetime CC screening is estimated to be as low as 5%. This study will evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a social network-based group intervention designed to empower women who have received CC screening to encourage women in their social network to also screen.

methodsForty adult women (index participants) who have recently screened for CC will be recruited, 20 of whom will be randomly assigned to take part in the intervention and 20 to the wait-list control. Each index participant will be asked to recruit up to three female social network members (i.e., alters; maximum total = 120 alters) who have not screened for CC to participate in the study. Assessments (survey and chart abstraction) will be administered at baseline and month 6 to index and alter participants. The primary outcome is CC screening among participating alters, with a secondary outcome being engagement in CC prevention advocacy among index participants. Repeated-measure multivariable regression analyses will be conducted to compare outcomes between the intervention and control arms. DISCUSSION: If successful, this intervention model has the potential not only to impact uptake of CC screening and treatment but also to establish a paradigm that can be applied to other health conditions.

trial registrationNIH Clinical Trial Registry NCT04960748 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Indexed as

Cervical cancerScreening uptakeSocial-network intervention

Identifiers

PMID36476609
PMCPMC9727870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.