ArticleGlobal bioethics = Problemi di bioetica2025
Informed consent in cervical cancer screening research in Butajira district, Ethiopia.
Article in Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cervical cancer screening remains limited in developing countries due to barriers such as lack of convenience and privacy. These challenges hinder both screening uptake and the process of obtaining informed consent. This study aimed to explore ways to address these barriers and support ethical participation in screening research. The study was conducted in three rural and one urban kebele in Butajira, Southern Ethiopia. A total of 58 participants - including community elders, religious leaders, women's representatives, and traditional association leaders - were selected through purposive sampling for focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. Two interview guides were used to explore consent, decision-making, and screening preferences. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis via QCAmap software. Participants generally understood the concept of voluntary participation but emphasized the need for clear communication about benefits. Although women could decide independently, many noted the importance of involving husbands. Initial suspicion about written consent was addressed through trust-building. A strong preference emerged for female providers during consent and procedures to enhance comfort. Self-sampling raised concerns about technical difficulty and cultural norms. Addressing cultural and ethical concerns is vital for improving cervical cancer screening participation. Insights from this study should guide future research and interventions in similar settings.
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.