ArticlePloS one2025
Validity of the process and outcome specific measure in women with abnormal Papanicolaou screening test.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Concurrent depression and anxiety in women undergoing additional diagnostic procedures due to positive screening for cervical cancer.PloS one · 2026Observational
- Predicting Pre- and Post-Diagnostic Depression in Women with Abnormal Pap Screening Tests: A Neural Network Approach.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWomen receiving abnormal Papanicolaou (Pap) findings often face psychosocial burden. This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Process and Outcome Specific Measure (POSM) in women with abnormal Pap screening test in Serbia.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted with 238 consecutive women attending cervical cancer screening. Exploratory factor analysis was used to determine the structure of the POSM, and Cronbach's alpha coefficient to assess internal consistency.
resultsThe factor analysis revealed two factors that explained 47.8% of variance: the first - Worry factor (4 items loaded onto the factor represented questions about worries), and the second - Information-Support factor (3 items loaded onto the factor represented questions about feeling informed well enough and being satisfied with support from others). The Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the Worry factor and the Information-Support factor were 0.572 and 0.428, respectively.
conclusionThe Serbian version of the POSM could be a useful tool for assessing worry and information-support in women with abnormal Pap smear results.
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.