ArticleBMJ open2024
Integration of cervical cancer screening into healthcare facilities in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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.
- Barriers and facilitators of adherence to cervical cancer screening follow-up among women living with HIV in South Ethiopia: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Trend analysis and epidemiological forecasting of colorectal Cancer mortality among reproductive-age women in sub-Saharan Africa.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Age-period-cohort analysis of global, regional, and national cervical cancer prevalence trends in women of childbearing age (15-49 years), 1990-2021.BMC women's health · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical cancer is the fourth most common malignancy in women, with 90% of deaths in low- and middle-income countries. Integrating cervical cancer screening services into healthcare facilities is crucial for overcoming the disease. Thus, this review aims to map existing evidence and identify barriers and facilitators in low- and middle-income countries.
methodsThe scoping review will employ a five-step framework as proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. These are (1) formulating the research questions, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) selecting eligible studies, (4) charting the data, and (5) collating, summarising and reporting the results. Five databases (MEDLINE, Maternity and Infant Care, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Science) will be systematically searched. Grey literature will also be searched. Data will be extracted, charted, synthesised and summarised. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require ethics approval. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, policy briefs and conference presentations.
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.