ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2026
Cervical cancer and screening: Knowledge, attitudes, and adherence among university students in Italy.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2026. 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.
- Investigating Online Discussions About Cancer Screening on Twitter (Subsequently Rebranded as X): Corpus Analysis.JMIR infodemiology · 2026Article
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
The objectives of this cross-sectional survey were to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward cervical cancer screening among female university students in Italy and to identify the associated determinants. The survey was conducted in July and September 2025 in Caserta and Naples, involving 1003 respondents. The average knowledge score regarding human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and cervical cancer was 12.6 out of 20, with only 2% achieving the maximum score. Knowledge was significantly higher among participants who were older, those in the medical field, those vaccinated against HPV, those who had oral sex, and those who received information from healthcare workers (HCWs). Only 12.7% perceived themselves at high risk for HPV-related cancer, with higher concern among those not in the medical field and those who had acquired information from HCWs. More than half (56.9%) considered Pap test useful, and this was more likely among older participants, those with a higher knowledge score, those who had received HPV vaccination, and those who had acquired information from HCWs. Among screening-eligible students aged ≥25 y, 65.1% had undergone cervical cancer screening, and 72.7% adhered to the recommended intervals. Screening uptake was higher among those older and those who had engaged in sexual intercourse. These findings highlight the urgent need for targeted health education interventions, optimized HCW communication, and the dissemination of information to improve awareness, risk perception, and cervical cancer screening uptake.
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.