ArticleEuropean journal of public health2026
Cancer prevention literacy in Europe: a cross-sectional study.
Article in European journal of public 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to assess cancer prevention literacy (CPL) levels and awareness of the European Code Against Cancer (ECAC) among the adult population in the European Union (EU), as well as identify social determinants associated with CPL. A cross-sectional study was conducted (February-March 2024) via an online survey across 23 EU-countries (n = 2312). Multivariate logistic regression models examined associations between explanatory variables (age, gender, educational level, history of cancer, region, and digital health literacy [DHL] quartiles) and knowledge outcomes (CPL, ECAC awareness, and cancer prevention specific knowledge topics). Although 81.4% of participants demonstrated sufficient CPL, 61.1% were unaware of the ECAC. Men were less likely to have sufficient CPL than women (OR = 0.66, [0.49-0.89]), and participants with an education below the university level had lower odds of CPL than those with higher education (OR = 0.50, [0.39-0.64]). DHL was the strongest predictor of CPL, with, participants in the highest DHL quartile being more than three times more likely to have sufficient CPL than those in the lowest quartile (OR = 3.11, [2.12-4.67]). Having a personal or family history of cancer also increased the odds of sufficient literacy (OR = 1.47, [1.10-1.94]). The findings reveal that while overall CPL appears sufficient, ECAC awareness remains alarmingly low. Persistent social and gender inequalities exist; lower educational level, male gender, and older age were consistently associated with lower CPL. DHL emerged as a key CPL determinant. Coordinated and targeted interventions are required to address these social inequalities and maximize the ECAC's preventive impact across Europe.
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.