ArticlePloS one2024
Socio-economic factors associated with cancer stigma among apparently healthy women in two selected municipalities Nepal.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From Mechanisms to Manifestations: A Scoping Review Exploring Cancer-Related Discrimination.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCancer is the primary cause of death globally, and despite the significant advancements in treatment and survival rates, it is still stigmatized in many parts of the world. However, there is limited public health research on cancer stigma among the general female population in Nepal. Therefore, this study aims to determine the prevalence of cancer stigma and its associated factors in this group.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study among 426 healthy women aged 30 to 60 years who were residents of Dhulikhel and Banepa in central Nepal. We measured cancer stigma using the Cancer Stigma Scale (CASS). CASS measures cancer stigma in six domains (awkwardness, avoidance, severity, personal responsibility, policy opposition, financial discrimination) on a 6-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to agree strongly) with higher mean stigma scores correlating with higher levels of stigma. We utilized Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) with multivariable linear regression to identify the socio-demographic factors associated with the CASS score.
resultsOverall, the level of cancer stigma was low, with a mean stigma score of 2.6 (0.6), but it was still present among participants. Stigma related to personal responsibility had the highest levels, with a mean score of 3.9 (1.3), followed by severity with a mean score of 3.2 (1.3), and financial discrimination with a mean score of 2.9 (1.6). There was a significant association between the mean CASS score and older age (mean difference in stigma score: 0.11 points; 95% CI: 0.02-0.20) as well as lower education (difference: -0.02 points; 95% CI: -0.03 to -0.003), after adjusting for age, ethnicity, education, marital status, religion, occupation, and parity.
conclusionWhile overall cancer stigma was low, some domains of stigma were higher among women in a suburban area in central Nepal; thus, indicating that cancer stigma persists in this region despite its low overall prevalence.
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.