ArticleBMC cancer2024
Baseline knowledge on risk factors, symptoms and intended behavior of women and men towards screening and treatment of cervical cancer in rural Uganda: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of community-based culturally tailored cervical cancer awareness interventions among women and decision-making men in low-resource settings: A pre-post design evaluation in rural Uganda and Bangladesh.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Perceived barriers and facilitators to conventional cervical screening: a qualitative study among women, primary health workers and community representatives in Uganda.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Views on cervical cancer screening among female caregivers at the Uganda cancer Institute.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundKnowledge of risk factors and symptoms of cervical cancer has been found to promote uptake of screening of cervical cancer. Most interventions targeted women without much involvement of men (husbands/decision makers) who are often decision makers in many low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed at assessing baseline knowledge and intended behavior of both women and men to enable design specific targeted messages to increase uptake of cervical cancer screening and promote early detection of women with symptoms.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted in two districts in Western Uganda using the modified African Women Awareness of CANcer (AWACAN) questionnaire. Women aged 30-49 years and their husbands/decision makers were interviewed. Knowledge on risk factors and symptoms, intended behavior and barriers towards participation in cervical cancer screening and treatment were assessed. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were done to establish the association between knowledge levels and other factors comparing women to men.
resultsA total of 724 women and 692 men were enrolled. Of these, 71.0% women and 67.2% men had ever heard of cervical cancer and 8.8% women had ever been screened. Knowledge of risk factors and symptoms of cervical cancer was high and similar for both women and men. Lack of decision making by women was associated with low knowledge of risk factors (X
conclusionThe baseline knowledge for cervical cancer was high in majority of participants and similar in both women and men. Their intended behavior towards screening was also positive but screening uptake was very low. This study suggests developing messages on multiple interventions to promote screening behavior in addition to education, consisting of male involvement, women empowerment and making services available, accessible and women friendly.
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.