Trial reportPloS one2025
Perceived effectiveness of messages to address cervical cancer screening barriers: An online experiment.
Trial report in PloS one, 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.
- The Cervical Cancer Paradox in Eastern Europe: How Knowledge and Institutional Trust Shape HPV Vaccination Attitudes in Romania.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Observational
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
introductionCervical cancer is almost entirely preventable through vaccination and screening, but screening rates still lag targets. Communication campaigns can encourage screening; however, the types of message content that are most effective are unknown.
methodsWe conducted an online randomized experiment testing messages within four themes aligned with previously identified screening barriers: cancer fatalism, inconvenience, lack of knowledge about risk factors, and unawareness of screening guidelines. A national convenience sample of US participants aged 21-65 years and assigned female at birth (n = 1,536) viewed one of three messages from each theme assigned at random and one control message in random order. We measured perceived effectiveness to encourage cervical cancer screening, anticipated social interactions, and self-reported learning. Mixed-effects linear models examined the impact of message theme on each outcome on a scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high).
resultsAll four barrier-focused themes encouraged cervical cancer screening more than the control (perceived message effectiveness mean and standard deviation: cancer fatalism = 3.44 (1.21); convenience = 3.43 (1.23); risk factors = 3.25 (1.23); screening guidelines = 3.44 (1.19); control message = 2.45 (1.35), p < .001). Barrier-focused messages similarly outperformed the control on anticipated social interactions and self-reported learning (all p < .001). Messages were less effective for participants who had never been screened or were out-of-date. However, regardless of screening status, barrier-focused messages outperformed the control.
conclusionsMessages targeting known barriers to cervical cancer screening were perceived as more effective than a control message. These messages could increase cervical cancer screening rates if used in interventions at scale.
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.