ArticlePLOS global public health2025
A realist evaluation of a novel cervical cancer prevention strategy in Iquitos, Peru.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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.
- Delivering cervical cancer screening and management to women in remote communities of the Peruvian Amazon: a mixed methods analysis of a mobile point-of-care intervention.Lancet regional health. Americas · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Proyecto Precancer is an implementation science and systems-thinking project with the objective of facilitating the adoption of a new screen-and-treat intervention for cervical cancer prevention in Iquitos in the Peruvian Amazon basin. This intervention introduced human papillomavirus molecular testing and shifted treatment from the tertiary level to the primary level through visual assessment for treatment and thermal ablation for those eligible. To inform how we scale up this pilot project to new regions in Peru in collaboration with the Ministry of Health, we conducted this realist evaluation to learn what worked in our pilot intervention in Iquitos, in what circumstances, for whom, and why. We developed four initial program theories, tested them through interviews with 32 stakeholders, we refined the four program theories based on the interviews, and added a fifth theory. This evaluation revealed that continuous engagement with providers in a horizontal manner across the systems' professional hierarchies (Program Theories 1, 4, and 5) and centering patients with a more convenient and accessible continuum of care can, ultimately, lead to improved screening and treatment rates and reduced patient loss to follow-up (Theories 2 and 3). Furthermore, we learned from our collaborators that embedded research within the public health system had high potential for sustainability due to local ownership. These insights will inform our work as this project assists the Ministry of Health in adapting and scaling up the intervention in other parts of Peru.
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.