Observational studyBMC public health2024
General practitioners may improve cervical screening equality in France.
Observational study in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVulnerable social groups have greater difficulty in accessing care and a lower quality of care. Health systems focused on primary care appear to be more effective, efficient and equitable. However, difficulties in accessing primary care are persisting. We focused on primary care screening for cervical cancer through Cervico-Uterine Smear (CUS), which has been shown to be effective in reducing disease incidence and mortality. In this study, we aimed to investigate the characteristics of women who undergo CUS according to the category of health professionals (general practitioners or gynaecologists) performing CUS and to analyse potential differences in access to care in terms of socioeconomic and geographical characteristics.
methodsThis was a retrospective observational study based on data from the main health insurance schemes in France, allowing analysis of health care consumption according to socioeconomic levels and proximity to health care services. We included women aged 25 to 64 years in 2012 for whom CUS would be a relevant procedure (695,694). The sociodemographic and territorial indicators were age, geographical area deprivation, and the availability of gynaecological care. The analysis was performed using multinomial logistic regression.
resultsA total of 202,271 (29%) patients underwent CUS; of whom 68% underwent CUS administered by gynaecologists and 28% were administered by general practitioners (GPs). However, inequalities in CUS screening rates were observed, with a decrease in the number of CUSs performed with increased age, a rural location, deprivation, and sparse health care provisions. Deprived people seemed less penalised by GPs.
conclusionsInvolvement of General Practitioners may improve cervical screening equality in France. The organisation of health systems around primary care may allow a better access to care and to account for the specific needs of deprived populations.
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.