ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2025
Barriers in implementing cancer prevention programme in North Eastern India: A case study from Meghalaya.
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & objectives India accounts for seven per cent of the global cancer burden, with the highest incidence reported from the northeastern region. To address this burden, the Government of India launched the National Programme for Prevention and Control of Cancer, Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Stroke (NPCDCS) in 2010, but this programme was implemented in Meghalaya four years after its launch. This paper aims to examine the implementation facilitators and barriers to cancer prevention in Meghalaya within the NPCDCS framework. Methods A desk review prior to the interviews enabled selection of relevant stakeholders from the health system. In this qualitative study, fifty-six healthcare professionals and frontline health workers from various tiers of the health system were involved through twenty in-depth interviews (IDIs) with healthcare professionals and four focus group discussions (FGD) with the frontline health workers. Data were transcribed in local language and subsequently in English. A hybrid coding strategy was adopted and a codebook was developed in MS Excel (version 16.6). NVivo-12 software was used to organize the data and codes, facilitating the identification and categorisation of emergent themes in alignment with the research question. Results While the programme is intended to provide equal attention to cancer prevention activities, hypertension and diabetes took priority. Barriers included inadequacy in information, education, and communication content on breast and cervical cancers; unavailability of acetic acid for cervical cancer screening; and lack of privacy for cancer screenings. Communication gaps stem from the absence of patient tracking mechanism and programme review meetings at NCD clinics. Training inadequacies affected staff confidence in conducting screenings, while low community awareness compromised the accuracy of data collated for the community-based assessment checklist. Preference for traditional healers further complicated the treatment pathways. Interpretation & conclusions Meghalaya's high cancer incidence underscores the urgency to address these gaps for efficient implementation of the cancer activities within NPCDCS framework.
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.