ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2026
Racial Differences in Expected Versus Actual Costs of Cervical Cancer Screening among Low-Income, Underscreened Women in North Carolina.
Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundPerceived financial barriers to cervical cancer screening in the United States are well documented. However, few data compare perceived cost barriers with actual screening costs. Our objective was to compare individuals' expected screening costs with actual screening costs. Additionally, we explore cost differences for Black and White participants to better understand how perceived financial barriers may contribute to screening disparities.
methodsWe utilized control arm (n = 227) data from the MBMT-3 trial of low-income underscreened women in North Carolina. At baseline, participants were asked their expected screening and screening-associated costs (i.e., lost wages, transportation, child/dependent care, etc.). After in-clinic screening, participants reported their actual costs. We calculated differences between individuals' expected versus actual costs, overall and for Black and White participants. We examined sociodemographic predictors of expected costs and expected-actual cost difference.
resultsParticipants expected screening to cost a median $200 (IQR: 100-300), primarily for appointments and laboratory tests. Black participants expected higher screening costs (median $265) than White participants ($205). Participants who completed screening overestimated expenses, with median expected costs of $215 compared with $5 for actual costs. Participants overestimated costs for every category: appointment and laboratory tests, lost wages, transportation, and child/dependent care. Actual costs were similar for Black and White participants.
conclusionEducational outreach about existing affordable screening services may reduce perceived financial barriers, particularly for historically marginalized populations. IMPACT: Among an underscreened population perceiving high financial barriers, participants overestimated screening costs, with Black participants expecting higher costs than White participants. High expected costs indicate low awareness of subsidized screening options. See related In the Spotlight, p. 1061.
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.