ArticleCureus2025
Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Medical Professionals Regarding Cervical Cancer Prevention and Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Article
- Community and health workers' perspectives on introducing HPV vaccination in a nonrollout district of Rajasthan, India: A qualitative study.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Despite being largely preventable through human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and regular screening, cervical cancer (CC) remains a major global public health concern. Healthcare professionals play a pivotal role in advocating for and facilitating these preventive measures. However, literature revealed that the gap in knowledge among the health professionals directly impacts the community. The study evaluated medical professionals' awareness, perceptions, and behaviors related to CC prevention and HPV immunization. Methodology An observational cross-sectional study was undertaken at a tertiary care hospital in Kolar, India, between August 2024 and February 2025. After systematic random sampling, 406 healthcare professionals (age >18 years) were selected who satisfied the inclusion criteria and completed a structured questionnaire assessing knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) related to CC and HPV. Data analysis was performed using SPSS software. Categorical variables were expressed as percentages and assessed using the chi-squared test. A p-value of less than 0.05 was deemed statistically significant. Results The mean age of the study participants was 26.7±13.1 years. Among them, 65.5% were aged ≤20 years, and 61.6% were female. While 77.5% had heard of CC and 83.2% identified HPV as the cause, knowledge gaps existed regarding screening guidelines and early symptoms. Only 51.2% were aware of pap smears, and 14.2% knew the correct annual screening frequency. Regarding attitudes, 90.1% recognized the medical professional's role in prevention, and 49.2% considered HPV vaccination essential. About 71.4% supported routine HPV immunization, and 66.9% were willing to recommend the vaccine. Around 75.3% identified a lack of awareness as a barrier. Regarding practice, 20.1% routinely performed CC screening, 17.3% were vaccinated against HPV, and 23.6% always recommended HPV vaccination. About 21.1% attended relevant workshops, and 59.1% expressed interest in future prevention events. Conclusion This study identifies gaps in knowledge and practice among healthcare professionals regarding CC screening and HPV vaccination, despite generally positive attitudes. Strengthening targeted education and capacity-building is essential to empower them as advocates in reducing the CC burden, particularly in underserved areas.
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.