ArticleThe European journal of general practice2025
Primary healthcare providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding cancer screening recommendation and referral in Georgia, 2023.
Article in The European journal of general practice, 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.
- Physician-Level Determinants of Cervical Cancer Screening Practices: A Socio-Ecological Model-Based Study from Adjara, Georgia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Gaps in Knowledge and Practice of Cervical Cancer Screening among Primary Health Care Workers in Lagos State, Nigeria: A Cross-Sectional Study.F1000Research · 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
Abstract
introductionCancer screening uptake in Georgia is only 13%. We aimed to assess cancer screening recommendations and referral practices among primary health care providers (PHC) and factors associated with these practices.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of 2,958 doctors and nurses in PHC in November 2023, using descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses to assess the association between provider characteristics, system-level factors, and practices in recommending and referring for cancer screening.
resultsRespondents were predominantly female (95%), mean age of 57.5 years, family doctors (56%), with >20 years' work experience (60%) and rural practice (67%). Almost all (98%) reported actively recommending and referring patients for cancer screening; however, 64.7% did so for only 1-5 patients per week, while 12% reported none. Predictors of higher recommendation and referral rates (≥6 patients per week) included being a family doctor (AOR 1.36; 95% CI: 1.11-1.67;
conclusionsDespite strong belief in cancer screening, recommendation and referral rates remain low, underscoring the urgent need for policy reforms to enhance education, raise awareness, and improve infrastructure for effective cancer screening initiatives.
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.