ArticleJournal of medical screening2026
Acceptability of, and preference for, human papillomavirus self-sampling for physically Disabled women: A cross-sectional survey.
Article in Journal of medical screening, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundPhysically Disabled women face multiple barriers to cervical screening, contributing to lower uptake and increased health inequalities. Human papillomavirus self-sampling has been shown to increase screening participation in under-screened populations, but little is known about its acceptability for Disabled women.MethodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted with 1493 UK-based participants who identified as having a physical disability, impairment, condition, or difference that makes cervical screening difficult or impossible. Participants completed questions on the acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling, attitudes and beliefs relating to self-sampling, and future screening preferences. Descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression were used to analyse responses.ResultsMost participants reported that they would be able to carry out self-sampling themselves (63.3%) and would be willing for a healthcare professional to use a self-sampling kit on their behalf (59.1%). Many (70.5%) had concerns about not performing the test correctly. Around half (53.0%) would prefer self-sampling at home if offered a screening choice. Women who had never attended screening, or who had delayed/missed appointments, were significantly more likely to prefer self-sampling (odds ratios 13.11 and 5.25, respectively) than women who had always attended. Approximately a fifth of participants (18.7%) would prefer a non-speculum clinician-taken test.ConclusionHuman papillomavirus self-sampling was acceptable to many physically Disabled women and preferred over conventional screening, particularly among those who had delayed/missed screening or never attended. Implementation should include tailored accessible instructions to support human papillomavirus self-sampling, disability-informed clinical support, and consideration of non-speculum clinician-taken samples to ensure equitable access and reduce inequalities in cervical screening.
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.