Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39121102›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2024

Randomized experimental population-based study to evaluate the acceptance and completion of and preferences for cervical cancer screening.

Marcela Vieira Lordelo, Cleyton Zanardo Oliveira, Luisa Aguirre Buexm, Rui Manuel Vieira Reis, Adhemar Longatto-Filho, Júlio César Possati-Resende, Fabiana de Lima Vazquez, José Humberto Tavares Guerreiro Fregnani

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Marcela Vieira LordeloMolecular Oncology Research Centre, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1714-2964
Cleyton Zanardo OliveiraBiostatistics, Centre for Teaching and Research, Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
Luisa Aguirre BuexmMolecular Oncology Research Centre, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.
Rui Manuel Vieira ReisMolecular Oncology Research Centre, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9639-7940
Adhemar Longatto-FilhoMolecular Oncology Research Centre, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.
Júlio César Possati-ResendePrevention Department, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.
Fabiana de Lima VazquezMolecular Oncology Research Centre, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-4109-9521
José Humberto Tavares Guerreiro FregnaniMolecular Oncology Research Centre, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cervical cancer has high incidence and mortality rates, especially in less-developed countries. Prevention methods are well established, but there are still barriers preventing some Brazilian women from undergoing a Pap sample. The objective of the study was to evaluate the acceptance, preferences and completion of four screening methods. This has an experimental design (community trial). A total of 164 participants who had never had a Pap sample or had not had one for more than three years were included. The city's urban area was stratified by census tracts and divided according to income and education levels. Women belonging to the lower-income strata were considered in the study. Random blocks were numbered into five intervention groups (Group 1- Pap sample at the hospital; Group 2- Pap sample in the mobile unit; Group 3- urine self-collection; Group 4- vaginal self-collection; Group 5- woman's choice). Only 164 women met all of the eligibility criteria (15.3%). Most of them accepted the assigned method (92%), but only 84% of the women completed the collection step. The acceptance rates were as follows: Group 1 (100%), Group 2 (64.5%), Group 3 (100%) and Group 4 (91.4%). In Group 5, the women's preferences were distributed as follows: examination performed at the hospital, 13 women (33.3%); examination performed at the mobile unit, 11 women (28.2%); urine self-collection, 11 women (28.2%); and vaginal self-collection, 4 women (10.3%). This study suggests that methods that allow cervical sampling collected near the women's domicile might improve the acceptance and completion of preventive tests. This finding is relevant for the development of new cervical cancer screening strategies.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerPatient Acceptance of Health CareUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultBrazilFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapanicolaou TestPatient PreferenceVaginal Smears

Identifiers

PMID39121102
PMCPMC11315343

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.