Trial reportBMC women's health2026
Effects of hands-on breast self-examination training on knowledge, health beliefs, and BSE practice among female university students: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC women's health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast self-examination (BSE) is a simple, low-cost method for promoting breast awareness and early detection of breast abnormalities, particularly among young women. However, lack of confidence and perceived barriers often limit regular BSE practice. Educational interventions that combine theoretical knowledge with hands-on training may enhance self-efficacy and support sustainable behavioral change.
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the effects of theoretical education alone versus theoretical plus hands-on BSE training on breast cancer knowledge, health beliefs, and BSE practice among female university students.
methodsThis randomized controlled study was conducted among 40 female university students residing in university dormitories. Participants were stratified based on pretest scores and randomly assigned to either a theoretical education-only group (n = 20) or a theoretical plus hands-on training group (n = 20). The primary outcomes were breast cancer knowledge, health beliefs, and BSE practice. Breast cancer knowledge was assessed at baseline, immediately after training, and at a 3-month follow-up using the Breast Cancer Knowledge Test (BCKT). Health beliefs were assessed at baseline and at the 3-month follow-up using the Champion Health Belief Model Scale. BSE practice frequency and perceived barriers were also recorded. Repeated-measures and mixed-design ANOVA and chi-square tests were used for data analysis.
resultsBreast cancer knowledge increased significantly in all participants from pretest to posttest (p < 0.001) and remained significantly higher than baseline at the 3-month follow-up, although a slight decline was observed. No significant Time × Group interaction was found for knowledge scores. In contrast, significant Time × Group interactions were observed for health motivation (p = 0.001), perceived barriers to BSE (p < 0.001), and self-efficacy (p = 0.005), all favoring the theoretical plus hands-on training group. Regular BSE practice increased from 0% at baseline to 60% at follow-up across the cohort, with a significantly greater increase in the hands-on training group compared with the theoretical-only group (75% vs. 45%, p = 0.038).
conclusionWhile theoretical education effectively improves breast cancer knowledge, the addition of hands-on BSE training is critical for reducing perceived barriers, enhancing self-efficacy, and promoting regular BSE practice. Incorporating hands-on training into breast health education programs may substantially improve behavioral outcomes among young women.
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.