Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37159437›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2023

A qualitative study to explore healthcare providers' perspectives on barriers and enablers to early detection of breast and cervical cancers among women attending primary healthcare clinics in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Gugulethu Tshabalala, Charmaine Blanchard, Keletso Mmoledi, Desiree Malope, Daniel S O'Neil, Shane A Norris, Maureen Joffe, Janan Janine Dietrich

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Gugulethu TshabalalaPerinatal HIV Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8402-543X
Charmaine BlanchardStrengthening Oncology Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Keletso MmolediStrengthening Oncology Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Desiree MalopeStrengthening Oncology Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Daniel S O'NeilYale Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, United States of America.
Shane A NorrisSouth African Medical Research Council Common Epithelial Cancer Research Centre, Tygerberg, South Africa.
Maureen JoffeStrengthening Oncology Services Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8616-9672
Janan Janine DietrichPerinatal HIV Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1949-3138
South African Medical Research Council · ZAUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZAYale Cancer Center · US

Funding

Novel predictors of survival among breast cancer patients with/without HIV in South AfricaR01CA250012 · NCI · WITS HEALTH CONSORTIUM (PTY), LTD · PI CUBASCH, HERBERT, EL-SADR, WAFAA M. · 2020 to 2024
$2.0M
HIV's Effects on Breast Cancer Treatment and Outcomes in South AfricaR01CA192627 · NCI · WITS HEALTH CONSORTIUM (PTY), LTD · PI JACOBSON, JUDITH S, JOFFE, MAUREEN · 2015 to 2019
$1.7M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA192627NCI NIH HHS R01 CA250012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low-and-middle income countries (LMICs) contribute approximately 70% of global cancer deaths, and the cancer incidence in these countries is rapidly increasing. Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, including South Africa (SA), bear some of the world's highest cancer case fatality rates, largely attributed to late diagnosis. We explored contextual enablers and barriers for early detection of breast and cervical cancers according to facility managers and clinical staff at primary healthcare clinics in the Soweto neighbourhood of Johannesburg, South Africa. We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews (IDIs) between August and November 2021 amongst 13 healthcare provider nurses and doctors as well as 9 facility managers at eight public healthcare clinics in Johannesburg. IDIs were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and entered into NVIVO for framework data analysis. Analysis was stratified by healthcare provider role and identified apriori around the themes of barriers and facilitators for early detection and management of breast and cervical cancers. Findings were conceptualised within the socioecological model and then explored within the capability, opportunity and motivation model of behaviour (COM-B) for pathways that potentially influence the low screening provision and uptake. The findings revealed provider perceptions of insufficient South African Department of Health (SA DOH) training support and staff rotations resulting in providers lacking knowledge and skills on cancer, screening policies and techniques. This coupled with provider perceptions of poor patient cancer and screening knowledge revealed low capacity for cancer screening. Providers also perceived opportunity for cancer screening to be undermined by the limited screening services mandated by the SA DOH, insufficient providers, inadequate facilities, supplies and barriers to accessing laboratory results. Providers perceived women to prefer to self-medicate and consult with traditional healers and access primary care for curative services only. These findings compound the low opportunity to provide and demand cancer screening services. And because the National SA Health Department is perceived by providers not to prioritize cancer nor involve primary care stakeholders in policy and performance indicator development, overworked, unwelcoming providers have little motivation to learn screening skills and provide screening services. Providers reported that patients preferred to go elsewhere and that women perceived cervical cancer screening as painful. These perceptions must be confirmed for veracity among policy and patient stakeholders. Nevertheless, cost-effective interventions can be implemented to address these perceived barriers including multistakeholder education, mobile and tent screening facilities and using existing community fieldworkers and NGO partners in providing screening services. Our results revealed provider perspectives of complex barriers to the early detection and management of breast and cervical cancers in primary health clinic settings in Greater Soweto. These barriers together appear potentially to produce compounding effects, and therefore there is a need to research the cumulative impact but also engage with stakeholder groups to verify findings and create awareness. Additionally, opportunities do exist to intervene across the cancer care continuum in South Africa to address these barriers by improving the quality and volume of provider cancer screening services, and in turn, increasing the community demand and uptake for these services.

Identifiers

PMID37159437
PMCPMC10168575
OpenAlexW4376132376

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.