ArticleCureus2024
Healthcare Provider-Related Factors in the Diagnostic Delay of Cervical Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Women's experiences toward cervical cancer care at the initiation of care: a qualitative study closing the gap policy and implementation in Indonesia.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Review
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
Background and objective Cervical cancer is the second most common malignancy among Indian women. In 2018, the World Health Organization (WHO) called for global action toward the elimination of cervical cancer through the triple-intervention strategy. One of its pillars is ensuring 70% screening coverage of eligible women with a high-performance test at least twice in their lifetime. Various factors contribute to the delayed diagnosis of cervical cancer, increasing the burden of the disease. In this study, we aimed to determine the healthcare provider (HCP)-related factors in the diagnostic delay of advanced cervical cancer. Methods This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted over two months in the cancer clinic of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, India. We interviewed 384 women diagnosed with advanced cervical cancer [the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IB3-IVB] by using a questionnaire to capture data inputs regarding the various healthcare services they had received in the past 10 years along with details of HCPs. The collected data were analyzed using the software STATA version 17.0. Results Among 384 participants, 185 (48.1%) had interacted with an HCP in the past 10 years; 157 (40.8%) of them had visited a healthcare facility. Among these 185 women, only 22.16% had been advised to undergo screening, and only 15.18% had been tested despite several having access to primary health centers within 10 km of their residence. The lack of screening guidance by HCPs accounted for 78% of delayed diagnoses of cervical cancer. Conclusions Based on our findings, a deficiency in screening guidance in the asymptomatic period by healthcare providers across various levels of our healthcare system contributed significantly to the delayed diagnosis of cervical cancer.
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.