Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39090654›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2024

Understanding women's and men's perspectives on cervical cancer screening in Uganda: a qualitative study.

Kathryn Bouskill, Glenn J Wagner, Mahlet Gizaw, Joseph Kb Matovu, Margrethe Juncker, Eve Namisango, Sylvia Nakami, Jolly Beyeza-Kashesya, Emmanuel Luyirika, Rhoda K Wanyenze

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Kathryn BouskillRAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90411, USA. gwagner@rand.org.
Glenn J WagnerRAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90411, USA.
Mahlet GizawRAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90411, USA.
Joseph Kb MatovuSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Margrethe JunckerRays of Hope Hospice Jinja, Jinja, Uganda.
Eve NamisangoAfrican Palliative Care Association, Kampala, Uganda.
Sylvia NakamiRays of Hope Hospice Jinja, Jinja, Uganda.
Jolly Beyeza-KashesyaMulago Specialized Women and Neonatal Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.
Emmanuel LuyirikaAfrican Palliative Care Association, Kampala, Uganda.
Rhoda K WanyenzeSchool of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.

Funding

Pilot of a network-driven, advocacy intervention to promote cervical cancer screening in UgandaR21TW011728 · FIC · MAKERERE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF HEALTH SCIENCES · PI WANYENZE, RHODA KITTI · 2020 to 2021
$396k
FIC NIH HHS R21 TW011728FIC NIH HHS R21TW011728
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical cancer remains a significant but preventable threat to women's health throughout much of the developing world, including Uganda. Cervical cancer screening and timely treatment of pre-cancerous lesions is a cost-effective means of mitigating cervical cancer morbidity and mortality. However, only 5% of women in Uganda have ever been screened. Barriers to screening, such as social stigma and access to safe conditions, have been previously identified, but insights into the role of male spouses in encouraging or discouraging screening have been limited. To our knowledge, no studies have compared barriers and facilitators among women who had or had not yet been screened and male partners of screened and unscreened women.

methodsTo resolve this gap, we conducted 7 focus groups- 3 among women who had been screened, 3 among those who had not been screened, and 1 among men whose female partners had or had not been screened. We performed qualitative thematic analysis on the focus group data.

resultsWe identified several important factors impacting screening and the decision to screen among women, ranging from stigma, availability of screening, false beliefs around the procedure and side effects, and the role of spousal support in screening promotion. Male spousal perspectives for screening ranged from full support to hesitancy around male-performed exams and possible prolonged periods without intercourse.

conclusionThis exploratory work demonstrates the importance of dialogue both among women and their male partners in enhancing screening uptake. Efforts to address screening uptake are necessary given that it is an important means of mitigating the burden of cervical cancer. Interventions along these lines need to take these barriers and facilitators into account in order to drive up demand for screening.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerFocus GroupsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeQualitative ResearchUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareSocial StigmaSpousesUgandaBarriersCervical cancer screeningFacilitatorsSocial beliefsSpousal supportUganda

Identifiers

PMID39090654
PMCPMC11293159

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.