ArticlePatient education and counseling2024
"A great step in treating cervical cancer": Patient and provider perceptions about cervical cancer therapeutic vaccines.
Article in Patient education and counseling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study explored patients and providers' perspectives on therapeutic vaccines for cervical cancer and assessed barriers and facilitators.
methodsQualitative semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with patients who had cervical dysplasia, or a past or current cervical cancer diagnosis and providers who provided care to patients with cervical abnormalities or cervical cancer. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis in NVivo.
resultsA total of 28 in-depth interviews were conducted with patients (N = 15) and providers (N = 13). Participants in both groups expressed enthusiasm for the prospect of a therapeutic vaccine for cervical cancer and were encouraged by less invasive treatment opportunities. Perceived patient barriers included concerns about side effects, eligibility criteria, costs, transportation, and logistical obstacles. Providers echoed these concerns, highlighted additional structural barriers such as racism and limited availability of culturally sensitive educational aids, and underscored the need for provider training on this topic.
conclusionOur results reinforce the need for future multi-level interventions discussing vaccine efficacy, durability, and safety, as well as addressing factors such as awareness, knowledge, and beliefs. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our findings can contribute to the development of provider and patient-centered tools that promote therapeutic vaccine acceptance.
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.