ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Experiences and Perceptions of Cervical Cancer Screening Using Self-Sampling among Under-Screened Women in Flanders.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Native American Women's Willingness to Screen for Both Cervical and Colorectal Cancer at Home.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Cervical Cancer Biomarkers in Non-Cervical Samples: Emerging Tools for Diagnosis and Prognosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- General Practitioners' Needs and Preferences Regarding the Provision of Self-sampling Tests for Cervical Cancer Screening in Flanders, Belgium.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Primary Human Papillomavirus (HPV) screening on samples collected by women themselves has proven to be an effective strategy for cervical cancer screening (CCS) and may increase participation rates in women who do not partake (regularly) in screening. The aim of this study is to investigate reasons for non-participation and perceptions of CCS using self-sampling methods among under-screened women in Flanders. Individual interviews with 15 underscreened women aged 30-64 years were conducted. During the interviews, participants were given the opportunity to try out a urine and vaginal self-sampling kit. Thematic analysis was based on Ajzen's model of the Theory of Planned Behavior. The results showed that 14 out of 15 participants were more likely to participate in CCS if they had the option to self-sample. One of the main findings was a lack of knowledge on different aspects of cervical cancer. Most women had a positive attitude toward cancer screening and primary prevention such as HPV vaccination. Subjective norms were influenced by healthcare professionals, peers, and organized government initiatives. Informational, organizational, contextual, and emotional factors were mentioned as barriers as well as facilitators for participation. Additionally, high self-efficacy was considered to make self-sampling more convenient. All women showed the intention to use at least one method of self-sampling. We can conclude that women who do not participate in CCS would be more motivated to participate using self-sampling methods. Adequate education and guidance should be provided.
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.