AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of care-seeking behavior interventions on cervical cancer screening participation.
METHOD: A pragmatic multiphase mixed methods design was adopted for this study, and three phases of the human-centered design process were used for data collection. Deductive thematic analysis was used for qualitative data, while SPSS was used for quantitative data analysis.
RESULTS: The findings show a significant relationship between participants' tribes p values (0.03) 0.05 and screening participation. Before the intervention, most (77.4%) were afraid of exposing their private parts; 75.9% were afraid of being diagnosed with cervical cancer; and the majority felt the procedure was embarrassing and painful. Free screening, awareness, and knowledge, offering transport, the use of influencers, and sample collection by a female care provider are among other facilitators to screening. Screening participation improved from 11.2% preintervention to 29.7% postintervention (average mean screening score from 1.890.316 to 1.70000.458). All participants who were screened postintervention said the procedure was not embarrassing or painful and that they were not afraid of the procedure or the screening environment.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, screening habits in the community were low before intervention, as this may have resulted from women's feelings and past experiences with screening services. Sociodemographic variables may not directly predict screening participation. Care-seeking behavior interventions have significantly increased screening participation postintervention.
METHODS: This paper reviews devices invented for different cervical cancer screening methods, which are Pap smear test, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) or Lugol's iodine (VILI), and HPV (human papillomavirus)-DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) self-test in terms of functionality, performance in solving the limitations of screening procedure and additionally where applicable, the cervical cell collection efficacy and abnormality detection accuracy. The devices are either available in the market, published in research articles or published in international patent databases.
RESULT: The reviewed devices either simplified the screening procedure to improve the clinical efficiency and accuracy in screening, reduced the pain and discomfort experienced by women during screening procedures, or achieved both outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Many devices have been invented to improve the screening procedures which may potentially improve the uptake in cervical screening tests and encourage the organization of screening campaigns to reduce cervical cancer incidence.
METHODS: An online questionnaire was circulated to different countries/cities in Asia-Oceania. The primary objective was to evaluate the coverage of HPV vaccination and cervical screening programs. The secondary objectives were to study the structures of these programs. Five case scenarios were set to understand how the respondents manage the abnormal screening results.
RESULTS: Fourteen respondents from 10 countries/cities had participated. Cervical cancer ranked the first in Myanmar and Nepal. About 10%-15% did not have national vaccination or screening program. The estimated coverage rate for vaccination and screening varied from less than 1% to 70%, which the coverage ran in parallel with the incidence and mortality rates of cervical cancer. All regions approved HPV vaccines, although only four provided free or subsidized programs for nonavalent vaccine. Cervical cytology remained the most common screening tool, and 20%-30% relied heavily on visual inspection using acetic acid. The screening age groups varied in different regions. From the case scenarios, it was noted that some respondents tended to offer more frequent screening tests or colposcopy than recommended by international guidelines.
CONCLUSION: This study revealed discrepancy in the practice of cervical cancer prevention in Asia-Oceania especially access to HPV vaccines. There is an urgent need for a global collaboration to eliminate cervical cancer by public education, reforming services, and medical training.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 370 Yemeni women in Selangor and Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Data on the awareness of symptoms/signs, risk factors, and screening programme were collected using Cervical Cancer Awareness Measurement (Cervical CAM) questionnaire.
RESULTS: More than 74% of the study participants were unable to recall any warning symptoms/signs, and 73% were unable to recall any risk factors. The factors associated with the awareness of symptoms and risk factors were age (95% CI 4.22-5.22, p = 0.039), marital status (95% CI 4.05-7.87, p = 0.021), employment (95% CI 3.89-5.77, p = 0.046) and the number of children (95% CI 5.33-6.54, p = 0.041).
CONCLUSION: The findings underline the need for public awareness campaigns to improve public awareness of cancer symptoms and risk factors among underserved communities.
METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, medRxiv and bioRxiv between January 2020 to October 2021 to identify studies that reported on the rates of screening mammography and breast cancer diagnosis before and during the pandemic. The effects of 'lockdown' measures, age and ethnicity on outcomes were also examined. All studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Rate ratios were calculated for all outcomes and pooled using standard inverse-variance random effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS: We identified 994 articles, of which 7 registry-based and 24 non-registry-based retrospective cohort studies, including data on 4,860,786 and 629,823 patients respectively across 18 different countries, were identified. Overall, breast cancer screening and diagnosis rates dropped by an estimated 41-53% and 18-29% respectively between 2019 and 2020. No differences in mammogram screening rates depending on patient age or ethnicity were observed. However, countries that implemented lockdown measures were associated with a significantly greater reduction in mammogram and diagnosis rates between 2019 and 2020 in comparison to those that did not.
CONCLUSION: The pandemic has caused a substantial reduction in the screening and diagnosis of breast cancer, with reductions more pronounced in countries under lockdown restrictions. It is early yet to know if delayed screening during the pandemic translates into higher breast cancer mortality.
METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, literature searches were conducted systematically through various databases including PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Oxford Academic Journals. Article identification, screening steps and eligibility measures were meticulously performed throughout the review.
RESULTS: A total of 22 papers were appraised and included in this review. Five main themes were generated which were socio-ethical misconceptions, cultural and religious beliefs, cultural and religious barriers, stigmatization and fear of breast cancer impact. Eight sub-themes and 14 sub sub-themes were further elicited from the main themes.
CONCLUSION: Muslim women have socio-ethical, cultural and religious misconceptions on what constitutes health and practices as well as on the nature and etiology of BC. Cultural barriers and religious values of Muslim women were indicated to influence their health behaviors such as upholding their modesty when choosing health interventions. BC stigma and fear were also found to be key sources of psychological distress that discouraged Muslim women from undergoing BC screening. The study suggests the implementation of holistic effort in educating Muslim women to increase BC screening rate.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The implementation research logic model guided the development of the study and implementation outcome measures were informed by the 'Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance' (RE-AIM) framework. This CRC screening intervention for Malaysia uses home-testing and digital, small media, communication to improve CRC screening uptake. A sample of 780 people aged 50-75 years living in Segamat district, Malaysia, will be selected randomly from the South East Asia Community Observatory (SEACO) database. Participants will receive a screening pack as well as a WhatsApp video of a local doctor to undertake a stool test safely and to send a photo of the test result to a confidential mobile number. SEACO staff will inform participants of their result. Quantitative data about follow-up clinic attendance, subsequent hospital tests and outcomes will be collected. Logistic regression will be used to investigate variables that influence screening completion and we will conduct a budget impact-analysis of the intervention and its implementation. Qualitative data about intervention implementation from the perspective of participants and stakeholders will be analysed thematically.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (MUHREC ID: 29107) and the Medical Review and Ethics Committee (Reference: 21-02045-O7G(2)). Results will be disseminated through publications, conferences and community engagement activities.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: National Medical Research Register Malaysia: 21-02045-O7G(2).
METHODS: Face-to-face interviews were conducted with a randomly selected community sample of 992 women (>40 years old) in Selangor State, Malaysia.
RESULTS: Approximately 35% of women received a clinical breast examination (CBE) and 27% had a mammogram within the last 1 to 2 years. The regression analyses indicated that Chinese ethnicity has higher perceived susceptibility to BC compared to Malay ethnicity (mean 7.74, SD: 2.75; 95% CI 0.09, 1.03) whilst a lower perceived susceptibility was observed in women aged ≥70 years (mean 6.67, SD: 3.01; 95% CI -1.66, -0.24) compared to women aged 40-49 years. Indian Malaysian women (mean 16.87, SD: 2.59; 95% CI 0.12, 1.01) and women who had received a CBE (mean 16.10, SD:2.35; 95% CI 0.18, 0.89) were more likely to have higher perceived benefits scoring. Indian ethnicity, secondary education and tertiary education, top 20% income group, past history of CBE and mammogram uptake were significantly associated with lower barriers scoring.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to target BC screening uptake improvement programmes towards communities in which women experience disadvantages related to income, education, employment, and, in particular, to tailor programmes to take into consideration differences between ethnic groups regarding their beliefs about cancer screening.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify, review, map, and summarize findings from different types of literature reviews on the use of mobile health (mHealth) technologies to improve the uptake of cancer screening.
METHODS: The review methodology was guided by the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews). Ovid MEDLINE, PyscINFO, and Embase were searched from inception to May 2021. The eligible criteria included reviews that focused on studies of interventions that used mobile phone devices to promote and deliver cancer screening and described the effectiveness or implementation of mHealth intervention outcomes. Key data fields such as study aims, types of cancer, mHealth formats, and outcomes were extracted, and the data were analyzed to address the objective of the review.
RESULTS: Our initial search identified 1981 titles, of which 12 (0.61%) reviews met the inclusion criteria (systematic reviews: n=6, 50%; scoping reviews: n=4, 33%; rapid reviews: n=1, 8%; narrative reviews: n=1, 8%). Most (57/67, 85%) of the interventions targeted breast and cervical cancer awareness and screening uptake. The most commonly used mHealth technologies for increasing cancer screening uptake were SMS text messages and telephone calls. Overall, mHealth interventions increased knowledge about screening and had high acceptance among participants. The likelihood of achieving improved uptake-related outcomes increased when interventions used >1 mode of communication (telephone reminders, physical invitation letters, and educational pamphlets) together with mHealth.
CONCLUSIONS: mHealth interventions increase cancer screening uptake, although multiple modes used in combination seem to be more effective.
METHODS: In total, 299 SNPs previously associated with prostate cancer were evaluated for inclusion in a new PHS, using a LASSO-regularized Cox proportional hazards model in a training dataset of 72,181 men from the PRACTICAL Consortium. The PHS model was evaluated in four testing datasets: African ancestry, Asian ancestry, and two of European Ancestry-the Cohort of Swedish Men (COSM) and the ProtecT study. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated to compare men with high versus low PHS for association with clinically significant, with any, and with fatal prostate cancer. The impact of genetic risk stratification on the positive predictive value (PPV) of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer was also measured.
RESULTS: The final model (PHS290) had 290 SNPs with non-zero coefficients. Comparing, for example, the highest and lowest quintiles of PHS290, the hazard ratios (HRs) for clinically significant prostate cancer were 13.73 [95% CI: 12.43-15.16] in ProtecT, 7.07 [6.58-7.60] in African ancestry, 10.31 [9.58-11.11] in Asian ancestry, and 11.18 [10.34-12.09] in COSM. Similar results were seen for association with any and fatal prostate cancer. Without PHS stratification, the PPV of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer in ProtecT was 0.12 (0.11-0.14). For the top 20% and top 5% of PHS290, the PPV of PSA testing was 0.19 (0.15-0.22) and 0.26 (0.19-0.33), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate better genetic risk stratification for clinically significant prostate cancer than prior versions of PHS in multi-ancestry datasets. This is promising for implementing precision-medicine approaches to prostate cancer screening decisions in diverse populations.
METHOD: Eleven focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with a purposive sample of 89 participants aged > 50 from the major ethnic groups in the Segamat District, Johor State. FGDs were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and translated into English. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: We identified trust in doctors as a key reason for whether or not to seek health care. Generally, the participants had low awareness of CRC sign/symptoms and screening. Emotional and logistic concerns about sending a stool sample to a clinic emerged as the main barriers to screening. Simplified illustrated instructions about stool collection in Malay, Chinese and Tamil, free screening at health clinics and reminders to complete the iFOBT test were perceived to facilitate engagement in screening, and posited as strategies that were likely to increase iFOBT uptake.
CONCLUSION: Primary care physicians play a crucial role in terms of reducing patient's misperceptions, recommending screening to patients, enhancing attendance, and improving uptake of CRC screening. There is a need for further research to investigate ways in which to reduce identified barriers and implement and test potential facilitative strategies as well as examine adherence by doctors to clinical guidelines about CRC screening.