ReviewNigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association
Determinants of Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake Among Antenatal Women in a Semi-Urban Hospital in Ebonyi State, Nigeria.
Review in Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cervical cancer remains a major cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality, especially among rural and semi-urban women in developing countries. Cervical cancer screening is a cost-effective method of detecting premalignant lesions of the cervix. The study aims to assess the practice and determinants of cervical cancer screening among women attending antenatal clinics in a semi-urban town of Ebonyi State. Methodology: The study was a cross-sectional study. Three hundred and ninety-six eligible participants were serially selected in the antenatal clinic. Data was analyzed using IBM-SPSS version 21.0. Percentages of the data were expressed. Chi-square was used to test for the level of significance, and P-values of < 0.05 were considered significant. Results: Majority had heard about cervical cancer, 75.2% of them had heard about the screening, and 66.8% of them believed that cervical cancer is preventable. The majority of the women who heard about cervical cancer have never been screened. Knowing that cervical screening was important was the major motivator in 46.8% of the women, while not knowing where to go for the screening was the major barrier. There is a significant relationship between the number of children had by the respondents and the level of uptake of the cervical cancer screening (P<0.05). Conclusion: There was poor uptake of cervical cancer screening among the respondents despite commendable knowledge about cervical cancer and screening. Screening should be widely available in semi-urban areas and should be effectively incorporated into other existing health services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42488872PMC13391121What 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.