ArticleInternational journal of behavioral medicine2026
The Convenience-anxiety Paradox: Carcinophobia and Screening Misconceptions in Minimally Supported Human Papillomavirus Self-sampling.
Article in International journal of behavioral medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHuman papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling often involves a "minimally supported pathway," wherein women receive results through impersonal channels without prescreening counseling. This "convenience-anxiety paradox" may cause psychological distress due to a communication vacuum between the healthcare system and the patient. This study assessed the prevalence and predictors of anxiety among women who received high-risk HPV results through vaginal self-sampling.
methodsSeventy-two women, comprising medical professionals and university staff, were included. Anxiety was evaluated using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Demographic data, coping action, and knowledge regarding HPV were collected via questionnaire. Distress related to cervical dysplasia was assessed using the Cervical Dysplasia Distress Questionnaire. Factors predicting anxiety were determined using multivariate logistic regression.
resultsAnxiety prevalence was 23.6% (n = 17). In multivariate analysis, the health consequences subscale was a potential predictor (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.60; p = 0.099). Furthermore, a statistically non-significant trend indicated that participants failing to distinguish "screening" (risk) from "diagnosis" (disease) of the test had an elevated point estimate for anxiety (aOR = 4.37; CI = 0.94-20.36; p = 0.060). Interestingly, working in medical practice did not mitigate anxiety (p = 0.412), indicating that in this sample, possessing professional health knowledge did not act as a protective factor against anxiety.
conclusionsAnxiety in HPV self-sampling may be associated with confusion regarding screening's purpose. Because medical professionals experienced similar anxiety levels as non-medical staff, professional health knowledge may not fully buffer against the "information vacuum." These results suggest a potential systemic communication gap; to scale self-sampling ethically, notification protocols should transition from simple result delivery to health-literacy-sensitive interventions that clarify the fundamental purpose of screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42834311What 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.