ArticlePortuguese journal of public health2022
Use of Cervical Cancer Screening among Patients of Primary Healthcare Services: Northeast Portugal.
Article in Portuguese journal of public health, 2022. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Understanding the overuse and underuse of cervical cancer (CC) screening plays a role in preventing such behaviours, allowing to maximize the CC screening uptake. Aim: To assess the predictors of being over-screened and never/under-screened in CC screening in Northeast Portugal. Methods: This is a part of a larger cross-sectional survey carried out in two public health centres in Northeast Portugal (October 2017 to June 2018). Data collection was based on a face-to-face interview. This analysis included 764 women (aged 25-60 years) classified according to the use of CC screening into guideline-consistent screened, over-screened and unscreened/under-screened. Multivariate logistic regression models were conducted to assess predictors of being over-screened and never/under-screened. Adjusted odds ratio (OR) and respective 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were obtained. Results: One-fourth ( Conclusion: The increase in CC health literacy can maximize CC screening uptake. Primary healthcare providers could play a role in preventing the overuse and underuse of CC screening.
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.