ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Access to advanced healthcare services and its associated factors among patients with cervical cancer in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Epidemiology of oncologic emergency in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Access to cervical cancer care in sub-Saharan Africa: a narrative review of barriers and opportunities.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to assess the extent of access to healthcare services, perception and associated factors among patients with cervical cancer in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Methods: A facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted from 01 July through 30 August 2023 at two tertiary hospitals. Cases with histopathologic and clinical confirmation of cervical cancer were enrolled using a consecutive sampling technique. Data was collected through a validated questionnaire administered by interviewers using the KoboCollect application. Subsequently, the collected data underwent analysis using Statistical Sciences for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26.0. Bivariable and multivariable regression models were performed at p ≤ 0.2 and p<0.05 statistical significance, respectively. Results: A total of 391 patients were enrolled in the study. Health facilities were accessible for obtaining general medical services (56.5%), drugs (57.3%), laboratory diagnosis services (57.0%), imaging diagnosis services (56.8%), and radiotherapy services (55.8%) of the patients. Cost of services was affordable only in 11.5% of the cases. Essential anticancer medicines were out of stock for 229 (58.6%) of the patients during the past three months. About two-thirds of the patients have a good perception of access to healthcare services. In multivariable binary logistic regression, admission to the inpatient (AOR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.06-0.67), joblessness (AOR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.08-0.46), lower level of income to the extreme poverty line (3567ETB)(64.9 USD) (AOR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.10-0.35), no CBHI coverage (AOR: 4.16, 95% CI: 1.76-9.85), having social support (AOR: 3.80; 95% CI: 1.96-7.41), and poor dietary practice (AOR: 2.36, 95% CI: 1.28-4.35) were found to have a statistically significant association with perceived good access to healthcare services. Conclusion: Only close to a half of the patients with cervical cancer, in Addis Ababa, have adequate access to healthcare services. Nearly two-thirds of the patients reported perceived good access to the services. Many factors were found to show a statistically significant association with patients' perceived access to healthcare services.
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.