ArticlePreventive medicine reports2026
Accelerating cervical cancer elimination: healthcare decision-making and cervical cancer screening uptake in sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study examined the association between healthcare decision-making and cervical cancer screening among ever-partnered women in SSA and assessed whether this relationship varies across countries. Methods: This cross-sectional study pooled Demographic and Health Survey data (2019-2024) from 114,764 ever-partnered women aged 25-49 years across fourteen SSA countries. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Country-by-healthcare decision-making interaction terms and adjusted predicted probabilities assessed contextual variation. Results: Overall, 13.00% of women reported ever being screened for cervical cancer. Compared with women making healthcare decisions independently, women whose partners made healthcare decisions alone (aOR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.81, 0.91) and those involved in shared decision-making (aOR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.90-0.99) had lower odds of screening. Screening uptake was higher among older, more educated, and wealthier women and those with media exposure, but lower among women with inequitable gender attitudes and living in rural areas and those reporting distance barriers. Significant country-level variation was observed. Conclusions: Healthcare decision-making is an important, context-dependent determinant of cervical cancer screening uptake in SSA. Context-specific, gender-responsive strategies that strengthen women's participation in healthcare decision-making are needed to accelerate cervical cancer elimination.
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.