ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Comparison of Cervical Cancer Screening Used between Individuals with Disabilities and Individuals without Disabilities.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cancer screening in people with intellectual disability: a scoping review of participation, barriers, facilitators, and improvement strategies within the EUCanScreen initiative.International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Association between gynecologic cancer and Alzheimer's disease: a bidirectional mendelian randomization study.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Principles for Service Delivery: Best Practices for Cervical Screening for Women with Disabilities.International journal of women's health · 2024Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCervical cancer is the fourth most prevalent cancer in women worldwide. It is vital to achieve a high cervical cancer screening rate among women. We compared the Pap smear test (PST) used between individuals with disabilities and those without disabilities in Taiwan.
methodsIndividuals registered in the Taiwan Disability Registration File and the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) were screened for this nationally representative retrospective cohort study. Women aged 30 and above in 2016 and who were still alive in 2016 were matched in a 1:1 ratio via propensity score matching (PSM); 186,717 individuals with disabilities and 186,717 individuals without disabilities were included. Controlling for relevant variables, the odds of receiving PST were compared using conditional logistic regression analysis.
resultsA lower percentage of individuals with disabilities (16.93%) received PST than those without disabilities (21.82%). The odds of individuals with disabilities receiving PST were 0.74 times that of individuals without disabilities (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.73-0.76). Compared to individuals without disabilities, individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities had the lower odds of receiving PST (OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.36-0.40), followed by individuals with dementia (OR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.33-0.48) or multiple disabilities (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.49-0.54).
conclusionsWe highly recommend that healthcare practitioners recognize the unique needs of individuals with different types of disabilities, especially those with cognitive impairments.
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.