ArticlePloS one2023
Recruitment strategies and HPV self-collection return rates for under-screened women for cervical cancer prevention.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Women's experiences and perspectives on a nurse navigation program for cervical cancer screening: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Preventing and mitigating fraudulent research participants in online qualitative violence and injury prevention research.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Culturally Competent Education and Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Achieves Healthy People 2030 Cervical Screening Target Among Low-Income Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic Women.JCO global oncology · 2024Article
- Performance of BD Onclarity HPV assay on FLOQSwabs vaginal self-samples.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- The Acceptability and Feasibility of Self-Collected HPV Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening Among Black and Latinx Women in Chicago: Perspectives from the Community.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Implications of viral infections and oncogenesis in uterine cervical carcinoma etiology and pathogenesis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the United States, medically underserved women carry a heavier burden of cancer incidence and mortality, yet are largely underrepresented in cancer prevention studies. My Body, My Test is a n observational cohort, multi-phase cervical cancer prevention study in North Carolina that recruited low-income women, aged 30-65 years and who had not undergone Pap testing in ≥ 4 years. Participants were offered home-based self-collection of cervico-vaginal samples for primary HPV testing. Here, we aimed to describe the recruitment strategies utilized by study staff, and the resulting recruitment and self-collection kit return rates for each specific recruitment strategy. Participants were recruited through different approaches: either direct (active, staff-effort intensive) or indirect (passive on the part of study staff). Of a total of 1,475 individuals screened for eligibility, 695 were eligible (47.1%) and 487 (70% of eligible) participants returned their self-collection kit. Small media recruitment resulted in the highest number of individuals found to be study eligible, with a relatively high self-collection kit return of 70%. In-clinic in-reach resulted in a lower number of study-eligible women, yet had the highest kit return rate (90%) among those sent kits. In contrast, 211 recruitment which resulted in the lowest kit return of 54%. Small media, word of mouth, and face-to-face outreach resulted in self-collection kit return rates ranging from 72 to 79%. The recruitment strategies undertaken by study staff support the continued study of reaching under-screened populations into cervical cancer prevention studies.
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.