ArticleBMC cancer2025
Multiple sexual partnership as an independent predictor of cervical cancer screening among women of reproductive age: an analysis of the 2022 Kenya demographic and health survey.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Global trends and future projections of cervical cancer burden: an integrated analysis of GBD 2021, UN population and WHO HPV vaccination data.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Predictors of multiple sexual partnerships and condom use among men engaged in transactional sex: a recursive bivariate probit analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys from 26 Sub-Saharan African countries.Tropical medicine and health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiterature shows that women's sexual behavior, specifically, engagement in multiple sexual partnerships (MSP) has some association with the risk of developing cervical cancer. In the context of the Kenyan demographic and health survey, MSP is defined as having more one sexual partner excluding spouse, in last 12 months. Yet, it is unclear how engagement in MSP independently predicts women's uptake of cervical cancer screening (CCS). The study examined the association between recent MSP and CCS uptake among women of reproductive age in Kenya.
methodsData of 16,824 women aged 15-49 who participated in the 2022 Kenya demographic and health survey was used. Recent MSP was defined as having more than one sexual partner, excluding spouse, in last 12 months. The analysis was carried out in STATA version 18. Chi-square tests, bivariable and multivariable logistic regression were performed. The adjusted odds ratio from the multivariable logistic regression were reported along with the 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultsThe analysis shows that only 16.68% of the sampled women (i.e., 2,837 out of a total sample of 16,824) had ever been screened for cervical cancer by a healthcare professional. In the bivariable analysis, women who were involved in MSP were more likely [OR = 1.20; 95%CI: 1.07-1.34] to undergo screening for cervical cancer compared to those not involved in MSP. This association remains significant after adjusting for confounders [AOR = 1.34; 95%CI: 1.19-1.52].
conclusionThe low screening rate in Kenya is concerning given the importance of early detection in improving cervical cancer outcomes. The study concludes that recent engagement in MSP is significantly associated with women's uptake of CCS. The study further concludes that there is a need for public health campaigns to raise awareness about the importance of cervical cancer screening among all women, regardless of their sexual behavior. Educational initiatives must emphasize that cervical cancer screening is crucial for all women, not just those with MSP.
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.