Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39285329›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2024

Breast cancer screening motivation among women: an application of self-determination theory.

Chau Thi Dang, Tu Thi Ngoc Nguyen, Trang Thi Thuy Ho, Sunjoo Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 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

4 authors.

Chau Thi DangHue University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University, Hue, Vietnam.
Tu Thi Ngoc NguyenHue University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University, Hue, Vietnam.
Trang Thi Thuy HoHue University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University, Hue, Vietnam. htttrang.humed@hueuni.edu.vn.
Sunjoo KangGraduate School of Public Health Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. ksj5139@yuhs.ac.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast cancer is a major health concern worldwide, especially in Vietnam. This study aimed to explore women's motivation for and factors related to breast cancer screening.

methodsA mixed-methods study was conducted in Danang, Vietnam, using a convergent parallel approach. This study utilized both quantitative and qualitative methods to gather the data. The quantitative approach involved surveys to assess motivation levels and related factors, including demographic information and experience with breast cancer screening. In-depth qualitative interviews were used to gain deeper insights into participants' perspectives and experiences related to breast cancer screening.

resultsThe average motivation score for breast cancer screening was moderate (3.55 ± 0.55). Ethnicity, regular health check-ups, family history of breast cancer, receiving information about breast cancer, and women's health issues have direct relationships with breast cancer screening motivation. According to the qualitative data, three categories emerged: intrinsic motivation, external motivation/internalization, and amotivation. The individual, and sociocultural environmental factors impacted screening motivation.

conclusionsThis study highlights the motivations behind breast cancer screening among women. Healthcare providers could use these findings to improve screening policies and guidelines and encourage more women to undergo regular screening, ultimately reducing the incidence of breast cancer in the community.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerMotivationAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesVietnamBreast cancer screeningMixed methodsMotivationWomen

Identifiers

PMID39285329
PMCPMC11406945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.