Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40750852›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2025

Acceptability, feasibility and appropriateness of integrating HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening into voluntary family planning services in Malawi.

Patani Mhango, Andrew Kumitawa, Monica Patricia Malata, Jennifer H Tang, Effie Chipeta, Bianca Kandeya, Medrina Mtende, Princess Kaira, Razak Mussa, Wanangwa Chimwaza and 11 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

Patani MhangoCentre for Reproductive Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi. pmhango@kuhes.ac.mw.
Andrew KumitawaDepartment of Community and Environmental Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Monica Patricia MalataCentre for Reproductive Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Jennifer H TangUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Effie ChipetaCentre for Reproductive Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Bianca KandeyaCentre for Reproductive Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Medrina MtendeCentre for Reproductive Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Princess KairaCentre for Reproductive Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Razak MussaCentre for Reproductive Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Wanangwa ChimwazaCentre for Reproductive Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Lameck ChinulaUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Ireen MagongwaUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Jacqueline MbenderaUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Eneli MhangoUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Eunice MwandiraUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Lizzie MsowoyaUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Jennifer S SmithUNC Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Mitch MatogaUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Agatha BulaUniversity of North Carolina Project-Malawi, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Luis GadamaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.
Victor MwapasaDepartment of Community and Environmental Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi.

Funding

USAID through the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine 2000010394
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite being preventable, the cervical cancer burden remains high in Malawi and other low-income countries. The World Health Organization recommends cervical cancer screening (CCS) using human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. The coverage of HPV-based CCS is low but may increase with self-sampling of vaginal fluid. We assessed the acceptability, feasibility and appropriateness of two models for integrating HPV self-sampling for CCS into family planning (FP) services in Malawi.

methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods study nested within a 1:1 cluster randomized trial comparing two service delivery models in 16 health facilities in Lilongwe and Zomba Districts: Model 1 involved clinic-based vaginal self-sampling and HPV testing, whereas Model 2 included both clinic-based and community-based self-sampling and HPV testing facilitated by community health workers called Health Surveillance Assistants (HSAs). The study population were healthcare providers purposively selected from the facilities. We administered a survey using a 5-point Likert-scale tool at the Pre-, Mid-, and Final implementation phases of the study, supplemented by in-depth interviews and focus group discussions ( > = 1 per facility) to clarify survey findings. We audio-recorded qualitative interviews and then transcribed and analysed data using Nvivo 12 software and thematic content analysis. The quantitative survey data were analyzed using the Fisher exact test to test for association in Stata Version 16.

findingsA total of 273 providers (nurses, clinicians, lab staff and HSAs) were recruited in the Pre- (n = 90), Mid- (n = 91), and Final-implementation (n = 92) phases. The majority of survey participants (> 90%) in both models agreed that integrating CCS into FP via HPV self-sampling was acceptable, appropriate, and feasible. Providers reported the following positive attributes of service integration and self-sampling: efficiency, reduction in workload (for clinicians and nurses), simplicity of self-sampling, cost-savings (for clients), promotion of women’s privacy and empowerment and reduction of negative myths and misconceptions associated with speculum vaginal examination. A minority of participants raised the following feasibility-related concerns: intermittent shortage of resources, increased workload for CHWs facilitating community-based sample collection, and lab personnel conducting HPV testing. Nevertheless, the availability of equipment and supplies, well-trained personnel, continuous mentorship, staff commitment, and teamwork facilitated the implementation of both models.

conclusionsBoth models of integrating CCS into FP were acceptable, feasible, and appropriate. They provide a platform to rapidly increase CCS uptake in Malawi. Nevertheless, strategies to optimize supply chain management and minimize the workload of CHWs and laboratory staff are needed to improve the scale-up of the models.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerFamily Planning ServicesHuman Papillomavirus VirusesPapillomavirus InfectionsPatient Acceptance of Health CareSelf CareSpecimen HandlingUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultFeasibility StudiesFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMalawiPapillomaviridaeCervical cancer screeningHPVImplementationIntegrationSelf-sampling

Identifiers

PMID40750852
PMCPMC12315379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.