ReviewHealth policy and planning2025
Cervical cancer prevention and control in Nigeria: mapping and review of policies.
Review in Health policy and planning, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cervical cancer is a significant public health issue in Nigeria and a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality among women. Equitable implementation of cervical cancer control programs alongside relevant policies and strategic plans is vital to reducing the burden of cervical cancer and improving the quality of life. Considering the role of policies in guiding program implementation, we reviewed Nigeria's cervical cancer policy landscape to identify strengths, limitations, and opportunities for improvement. This policy appraisal involved a literature review to understand related policy review frameworks, developing a modified framework containing six domains, systematically searching key databases and websites to identify relevant policy documents, data extraction and analysis, and synthesizing findings from reviewed documents. A total of five documents were reviewed in this study-three integrated cancer control plans, a cervical cancer policy, and a strategic plan for cervical cancer prevention and control. Two of the reviewed documents are current (2023-7), one is outdated, and two are expired. Key strengths identified in these documents include (i) a clear articulation of goals, (ii) a collaborative development process, (iii) the adoption of a phased implementation approach for proposed interventions, (iv) detailed intervention plans, and (v) monitoring and evaluation plans with performance indicators. In contrast, key limitations include (i) poor participation of subnational level stakeholders, (ii) absence of costing and funding approach in some plans, (iii) lack of baseline data on unmet needs and outcomes of previous plans, and (iv) absence of health system resource mapping. Addressing identified limitations is critical to improving the quality of policy and policy-informing documents, strengthening implementation across all levels, lowering the cervical cancer burden, and improving women's health outcomes.
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.