ArticleBMC women's health2025
Understanding hesitancy: barriers to HR-HPV self-sampling among women at high risk for cervical cancer in Latvia.
Article in BMC women's health, 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
- Factors associated with women's choice for mode of cervical sampling in future cervical cancer screening.PloS one · 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
backgroundHigh-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) is the leading cause of cervical cancer. Screening is one of the main cornerstones of cervical cancer prevention. Self-sampling for HR-HPV is introduced to improve patient involvement in the screening program. The study aimed to understand the hesitancy and barriers to self-sampling among high-risk women who are at risk of developing cervical cancer.
methodsThis qualitative study employed semi-structured telephone interviews to explore the factors behind the refusal of HR-HPV self-sampling among twelve purposefully selected women (aged 25-49) with abnormal Pap smears recruited from a colposcopy clinic within a major urban university hospital in Riga, Latvia. The interviews, conducted between June and September 2022, were transcribed verbatim and subjected to inductive content analysis.
resultsFour inductive categories were developed and described: (1) 'Clinic visit-related distress' described patients' situational anxiety, fears, and during the visit to a healthcare facility that resulted in the refusal to take the HR-HPV self-sampling; (2) 'Health literacy challenges' highlighted patients' lack of knowledge and understanding of cervical cancer causation and screening role in the early detection of cervical cancer; (3) 'Doctor does and knows the best' explored patients' doubts and fears about the accuracy and comparability of HR-HPV self-sampling with conventional screening methods; (4) 'Circumstances that can promote taking the HR-HPV self-sampling' illuminated the circumstances that can encourage women to take the HR-HPV self-sampling.
conclusionsA complex interplay of contextual factors contributed to the hesitancy of HR-HPV self-sampling in the group of women at high risk for cervical cancer, highlighting that women's decision-making regarding this procedure goes beyond its purely clinical aspects.
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.