ArticleHealth promotion international2024
Stakeholder perceptions of cervical screening accessibility and attendance in Ireland: a qualitative study.
Article in Health promotion international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
Organized cervical screening programmes are commonplace in high-income countries. To provide an equitable cervical screening service, it is important to understand who is and is not attending screening and why. Promotion of screening and service improvement is not possible without recognition and identification of the barriers and needs of communities that are less engaged with screening. This study explored stakeholder perceptions of cervical screening attendance and accessibility in Ireland. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 healthcare professionals, policymakers and academics. Interviews were conducted online in 2022. Reflexive thematic analysis was used inductively to generate themes, supported by NVivo. Three themes were developed: (i) getting the right information out the right way, (ii) acceptability and accessibility of screening and (iii) trying to identify and reach the non-attenders. Participants felt public knowledge of cervical screening and human papilloma virus was low and communication strategies were not adequate. Individual, cultural, structural and service-level factors influenced the accessibility and acceptability of screening. Identifying and reaching non-attenders was considered challenging and community outreach could support those less likely to attend screening. Stakeholder perspectives were valuable in understanding the complexities of screening accessibility and attendance from individual to service-level factors. Cultural competency training, inclusive language and visual cues in waiting rooms would support engagement with some populations who may be hesitant to attend screening. Collaboration with community organizations has opportunities to promote screening and understand the needs of those less likely to attend screening.
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.