ArticleThe oncologist2025
Barriers to adherence of posttreatment follow-up after positive primary cervical cancer screening in Ethiopia: a mixed-methods study.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Follow-up rescreening among women living with human immunodeficiency virus who tested positive and treated for cervical pre-cancer lesions in South Ethiopia.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators of adherence to cervical cancer screening follow-up among women living with HIV in South Ethiopia: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Poor adherence to cancer therapy in Ethiopia: systematic review and meta-analysis.Public health reviews · 2026Review
- Vaccinating girls, abandoning women: the financing asymmetry between HPV immunization and the cervical cancer treatment cascade in low- and middle-income countries.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Long-term risk and predictors of high-risk human papillomavirus persistence after thermal ablation amongst women living with HIV in West Africa.HIV medicine · 2025Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEven though it is preventable, cervical cancer contributes significantly to cancer-related mortality among Ethiopian women. Follow-up visits after treatment of precancerous lesions are essential to monitor lesion recurrence. In our previous study, we found a level of adherence to follow-up of 44.7%, but the reasons for low adherence have not been comprehensively explored within the Ethiopian context. This study aimed to identify these reasons by interviewing 167 women who had missed their follow-up appointments as well as 30 health professionals with experience in the field.
methodsThe study employed a mixed-methods approach: Quantitative data were collected through a telephone questionnaire conducted with 167 women who had a positive visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) and had missed their follow-up appointments. Subsequently, in-depth interviews were conducted with 30 healthcare professionals, and an inductive content analysis was carried out.
resultsIn the patient interviews, the reasons given most often were "lack of information about the follow-up" (35; 21.1%), "forgetting the appointment" (30; 18.1%), and "not seeing the need for follow-up" (24; 14.5%). Healthcare professionals identified various reasons such as lack of knowledge, living in a remote area/changing living area, forgetfulness, fear, poor counseling, a shortage of trained healthcare providers to give counseling and follow-up, and reminder-related barriers.
conclusionLack of knowledge, forgetfulness, poor health-seeking behavior, and a lack of reminders were identified as barriers contributing to the low uptake of rescreening. Further interventions should target these by creating community awareness, improving patient counseling, tracing patients in need of follow-up, and making reminder calls or using SMS.
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.