ReviewPreventive medicine reports2023
How is equity captured for colorectal, breast and cervical cancer incidence and screening in the Republic of Ireland: A review.
Review in Preventive medicine reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of an online nomogram to predict breast cancer screening participation among high-risk women: A cross-sectional study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Programmed death 1 antibody drug conjugates (PD 1 ADCs): Innovations in overcoming resistance and enhancing immune mediated antitumor activity.Translational oncology · 2026Review
- Estimating Eligibility for Lung Cancer Screening in Ireland: A Dynamic Modelling Study of Smoking Trends.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- A global scoping review of interventions to increase participation in screening programmes for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer between 2016 and 2025.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Co-designing solutions to promote awareness of cervical screening with women of low socio-economic position living in urban areas.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Redefining cancer care: the importance of primary care cancer research in Ireland.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Review
- The mediating effect of self-efficacy on social support and cancer screening behavior among Chinese women: a cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- Overcoming barriers to cervical screening attendance among underrepresented populations in Europe.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024Article
- Stakeholder perceptions of cervical screening accessibility and attendance in Ireland: a qualitative study.Health promotion international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Organised screening reduces the incidence and late-stage diagnosis of cancer. However, participation in screening is not consistent across populations. Variations can be measured using demographic factors on place of residence, race/ethnicity, occupation, gender/sex, religion, education, socio-economic position (SEP), and social capital (PROGRESS-Plus stratifiers). The Republic of Ireland has screening programmes for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer but assessment of screening participation and cancer incidence is inconsistent. The review aimed to evaluate the use of stratifiers in breast, cervical and colorectal cancer incidence and screening literature, and assess variations in incidence and screening participation across subgroups in Ireland. Methods: PubMed was searched systematically and grey literature was identified via Google, Google Scholar, Lenus (Irish Health Research repository), and The Irish Longitudinal Study of Aging (TILDA) in June 2022. Studies were included if they captured stratifiers alongside incidence or screening participation data of the three cancers. Results: Thirty-six studies and reports were included. Place of residence, SEP, sex, and age were most frequently captured. Incidence and screening participation varied by age, place of residence, SEP, and sex. Discussion: PROGRESS-Plus is a useful equity lens to review health literature. Cancer incidence and screening participation studies lacked a comprehensive equity lens resulting in difficulties in identifying inequities and non-attenders. Place of residence, SEP and ethnicity should be prioritised in monitoring inequities. Integrating unique health identifiers should improve monitoring and enable evidence-based population-specific interventions to promote screening. Collaboration with community organisations would support engagement with vulnerable populations when data is limited.
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.