ArticleBMJ open2024
What are the barriers towards cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women? A qualitative comparative analysis of stakeholder perspectives in seven European countries.
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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of real-time PCR assays for human papillomavirus using urine samples: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- The co-creation of a document to guide the use of self-sampling for human papillomavirus screening in Italy.Journal of medical screening · 2026Article
- Actively engaging multi-level stakeholders in cancer screening and cancer-related studies: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Women's preferences for cervical cancer screening methods: a discrete choice experiment in Estonia and France.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- 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
- Human Papillomavirus Infection and Cervical Cytology Among Vulnerable Women in Rome, Italy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Patient experience and shared decision-making in HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer: A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative evidence.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2025Review
- Accelerating HPV-related cancer elimination - a meeting report.BMC proceedings · 2025Article
- Article
- Mortality of Three Major Gynecological Cancers in the European Region: An Age-Period-Cohort Analysis from 1992 to 2021 and Predictions in a 25‑Year Period.Annals of global health · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessing the Capacity of Health Facilities to Deliver Concomitant HPV Vaccination and HPV-Based Cervical Screening Services to Vulnerable Populations - An Implementation Research Protocol.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to map and compare stakeholders' perceptions of barriers towards cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women in seven European countries.
designIn Collaborative User Boards, stakeholders were invited to participate to identify barriers towards participation in cervical cancer screening.
settingThe study is nested in the European Union-funded project CBIG-SCREEN which aims to tackle inequity in cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women (www.cbig-screen.eu). Data collection took place in Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy, Portugal and Romania.
participantsParticipants represented micro-level stakeholders covering representatives of users, that is, vulnerable women, meso-level stakeholders covering healthcare professionals and social workers, and macro-level stakeholders covering programme managers and decision-makers.
methodsAcross the seven countries, 25 meetings in Collaborative User Boards with a duration of 2 hours took place between October 2021 and June 2022. The meetings were video recorded or audio recorded, transcribed and translated into English for a qualitative framework analysis.
results120 participants took part in the Collaborative User Boards. Context-specific barriers were related to different healthcare systems and characteristics of vulnerable populations. In Romania and Bulgaria, the lack of a continuous screening effort and lack of ways to identify eligible women were identified as barriers for all women rather than being specific for women in vulnerable situations. The participants in Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy and Portugal identified providers' lack of cultural and social sensitivity towards vulnerable women as barriers. In all countries, vulnerable women's fear, shame and lack of priority to preventive healthcare were identified as psychological barriers.
conclusionThe study provides an overview of stakeholders' perceived barriers towards vulnerable women's cervical cancer screening participation in seven European countries. The organisation of healthcare systems and the maturity of screening programmes differ between countries, while vulnerable women's psychological barriers had several similarities.
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.