ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2026
A preference study for applying mHealth to improve the quality of cervical cancer screening management from a supply and demand perspective: a discrete choice experiment.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to investigate the preferences of women of cervical cancer screening age regarding the use of mobile health (mHealth) technologies in Xinjiang. The purpose is to enhance adherence and acceptance of mHealth applications, thereby improving the quality of cervical cancer screening follow-up for women residing in rural areas of Xinjiang.
methodsThe attributes and levels were established based on a comprehensive literature review and qualitative interviews. The choice set questionnaire was developed using SAS 9.4 through D-efficiency analysis. The research site was identified using a multi-stage sampling method, and the survey was launched in December 2024. An Optimal Logit model was selected for preference analysis, utilizing Stata 17.0.
resultsA total of six attributes were identified through the literature review and subsequently combined with qualitative interviews. The mixed logit regression results indicated that, among the six attributes, five were statistically significant (P < 0.05): mHealth approach, frequency of receiving notifications, reminder content, screening notification time, missionary form, and mission strategy. The results demonstrated a preference for WeChat as the mHealth approach (β = 0.230, P < 0.001, 95%CI 1.214-1.500), not accepting receiving notifications everyday (β = - 0.144, P = 0.001, 95%CI 0.797-0.940), preferred reminders containing positive information (β = 0.159,P = 0.001,95%CI1.068-1.288), opted for screening notifications 1 month in advance (β = 0.208, P < 0.001, 95%CI 1.133-1.339), and preferred the image form of education for missionary form (β = 0.118, P < 0.001, 95%CI 1.102-1.322).
conclusionA one-size-fits-all approach should be avoided in the design of mHealth solutions to effectively address the diverse needs of individuals with varying preferences, thereby promoting the adoption of mHealth and improving the feasibility of its application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41931174What 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.