ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2026
Developing patient-centered educational material to improve colposcopy adherence.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To assess acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of implementing the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) colposcopy pamphlet among patients with low socioeconomic status. We then aimed to create new educational material with input from community stakeholders to effectively improve colposcopy knowledge. Methods: We conducted a multi-phase pilot study at a university-based colposcopy clinic that serves patients with low income who are under- or uninsured. In Phase 1, 25 new patients assessed the ACOG pamphlet with validated measures of Acceptability, Appropriateness, and Feasibility. In Phase 2, we consulted 12 community stakeholders to create Tailored Education to Advance Cervical Health (TEACH). In Phase 3, 25 new patients completed pre-post knowledge tests alongside viewing TEACH and assessed implementation as in Phase 1. One-tailed Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare pre- and posttest knowledge scores. Results: Among 50 patients enrolled in Phases 1 and 3, median age was 37.6 (IQR = 19.5) and 74% identified as non-White. 76% of Phase 1 participants found the ACOG pamphlet acceptable, appropriate, and feasible. They suggested elaborating on colposcopy's steps and clinical indications. In Phase 2, stakeholders improved TEACH's content and delivery. In Phase 3, 88% of participants found TEACH to be acceptable, appropriate (92%), and feasible (96%). Participants' understanding of colposcopy significantly increased after reading TEACH (median Conclusions: When designed with patient and community input, educational materials can positively impact patients' understanding of colposcopy. TEACH should be tested longitudinally in diverse samples to determine its impact on colposcopy adherence.
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.