ArticlePloS one2024
Understanding cervical cancer awareness in hard-to-reach areas of Bangladesh: A cross-sectional study involving women and household decisionmakers.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Effectiveness of community-based culturally tailored cervical cancer awareness interventions among women and decision-making men in low-resource settings: A pre-post design evaluation in rural Uganda and Bangladesh.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Awareness and Knowledge Levels of Cervical Cancer and HPV and Attitudes Toward HPV Vaccination in Algeria.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Integrating pocket colposcope and telecolposcopy into VIA-based screening at primary healthcare centers for cervical cancer prevention in LMICs.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn Bangladesh, the uptake of cervical cancer screening is low. Lack of knowledge and understanding of symptoms and risk factors contributes to low screening uptake. The purpose of this study was to explore the knowledge of cervical cancer risk factors and symptoms and to measure the association with socio-demographic characteristics among women and household decisionmakers living in hard-to-reach areas of Bangladesh.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in five districts in Bangladesh among women aged between 30 and 60 years, their husbands, and their mothers-in-law from April to September 2022. Data were collected using a modified version of the validated AWACAN questionnaire tool. The significance level was considered at p-value <0.05 and odds ratios with 95% confidence.
resultsNearly 50% of participating women in hard-to-reach areas of Bangladesh and their family decisionmakers had low levels of knowledge of the risk factors and symptoms of cervical cancer. Only 20% of respondents in our survey knew about HPV, the most important risk factor for developing cervical cancer. Most respondents were familiar with the terminology of cervical cancer as a disease; however, approximately 40% of respondents did not know that not adhering to cervical cancer screening could be seen as a risk factor. Women do not make decisions about participation in cervical cancer screening on their own. Knowledge of cervical cancer risk factors and symptoms among decisionmakers was significantly associated with higher education and higher household monthly expenditure.
conclusionWomen, their husbands, and mothers-in-law in hard-to-reach areas of Bangladesh had limited knowledge about cervical cancer risk factors and symptoms. Engaging these key decision-makers in targeted health education is vital to improve screening uptake. Conduction of future research to identify and address screening barriers is also essential for effective prevention efforts.
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.