Explore the vast range of titles available.

The main aims of this paper are to analyse the monetary value of informal care time using different techniques and to identify significant variables associated with the number of caregiving hours. A multicentre study in two Spanish regions in adult caregivers was conducted. A total sample of 604 people was available. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify the variables associated with the number of hours of caregiving time. In the monetary valuation of informal care provided, three approaches were used: replacement cost method, opportunity cost and contingent valuation (willingness to pay and willingness to accept). The main determinants of the amount of time of informal care provided were age, gender, the level of care receiver´s dependence and the professional care services received (at home and out of home). The value estimated for informal care time ranges from EUROS 80,247 (replacement cost method) to EUROS 14,325 (willingness to pay), with intermediate values of EUROS 27,140 and EUROS 29,343 (opportunity cost and willingness to accept, respectively). Several sensitivity analyses were performed over the base cases, confirming the previous results. Time of informal care represents a great social value, regardless of the applied technique. However, the results can differ strongly depending on the technique chosen. Therefore, the choice of technique of valuation is not neutral. Among the determinants of informal care time, the professional care received at home has a complementary character to informal care, while the formal care outside the home has a substitute character.

Background Training health care providers to administer visual inspection after application of acetic acid (VIA) is paramount in improving cervical cancer screening services for women in low- and middle-income countries. The objective of this systematic review was to create a framework of essential VIA training components and provide illustrating examples of how VIA training programs can be carried out in different clinical settings. Methods A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (from 2006 to 2021) was undertaken. Our inclusion criteria comprised articles reporting on implemented cervical cancer screening programs using VIA in a screen-and-treat approach. Trained health care providers with any level of health education were included, and the outcome of interest was the reporting of training components. Data were extracted by two reviewers, and a narrative synthesis of the training programs was performed. We developed a framework of seven essential training components and applied it to assess how training courses were conducted in different settings. Results 13 primary studies were eligible for inclusion, including 2,722 trained health care providers and 342,889 screened women. Most training courses lasted 5–7 days and included theoretical education, practical skill development, and competence assessment. It was unclear how visual aids and training in client counselling and quality assessment were integrated in the training courses. After the training course, nearly all the VIA training programs made provisions for on-job training at the providers’ own clinical settings through supervision, feedback, and refresher training. Conclusions This study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing international training recommendations for cervical cancer screening in real-world settings and provides valuable examples of training program implementation across various clinical settings. The diverse reporting practices of quality indicators in different studies hinder the establishment of direct links between these data and training program effectiveness. To enhance future reporting, authors should emphasize specific training components, delivery methods, and contextual factors. Standardized reporting of quality indicators for effective evaluation of VIA training programs is recommended, fostering comparability, facilitating research, and enhancing reporting quality in this field.

This article reviews recent evidence from the International Agency for Research on Cancer on the best methods of screening for cervical cancer, including by means of conventional cytology, visual inspection with acetic acid, human papillomavirus (HPV) nucleic acid testing, and combinations of these tests. HPV nucleic acid testing was superior whether used alone or in combination with other methods.

BackgroundThis study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness studies of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening uptake rates in underserved women in Europe.MethodsA search of Embase, Medline, Global Health, PsychINFO, and NHS Economic Evaluation Database was conducted for studies published between January 2000 and September 2022. Studies were eligible if they analysed the cost-effectiveness of any interventions to improve participation in cervical cancer screening among underserved women of any age eligible to participate in cervical cancer screening in European countries, in any language. Study characteristics and cost-effectiveness results were summarised. Study quality was assessed using the Drummond Checklist, and methodological choices were further compared.ResultsThe searches yielded 962 unique studies, with 17 of these (from twelve European countries) meeting the eligibility criteria for data extraction. All studies focused on underscreened women as an overarching group, with no identified studies focusing on specific subgroups of underserved women. Generally, self-HPV testing and reminder interventions were shown to be cost-effective to increase the uptake rates. There was also research showing that addressing access issues and adopting different screening modalities could be economically attractive in some settings, but the current evidence is insufficient due to the limited number of studies.ConclusionThis systematic review has revealed a gap in the literature on the cost-effectiveness of interventions to improve uptake rates of cervical cancer screening through tailored provision for specific groups of underserved women.

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to map and compare stakeholders’ perceptions of barriers towards cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women in seven European countries.DesignIn Collaborative User Boards, stakeholders were invited to participate to identify barriers towards participation in cervical cancer screening.SettingThe study is nested in the European Union-funded project CBIG-SCREEN which aims to tackle inequity in cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women (www.cbig-screen.eu). Data collection took place in Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy, Portugal and Romania.ParticipantsParticipants represented micro-level stakeholders covering representatives of users, that is, vulnerable women, meso-level stakeholders covering healthcare professionals and social workers, and macro-level stakeholders covering programme managers and decision-makers.MethodsAcross the seven countries, 25 meetings in Collaborative User Boards with a duration of 2 hours took place between October 2021 and June 2022. The meetings were video recorded or audio recorded, transcribed and translated into English for a qualitative framework analysis.Results120 participants took part in the Collaborative User Boards. Context-specific barriers were related to different healthcare systems and characteristics of vulnerable populations. In Romania and Bulgaria, the lack of a continuous screening effort and lack of ways to identify eligible women were identified as barriers for all women rather than being specific for women in vulnerable situations. The participants in Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy and Portugal identified providers’ lack of cultural and social sensitivity towards vulnerable women as barriers. In all countries, vulnerable women’s fear, shame and lack of priority to preventive healthcare were identified as psychological barriers.ConclusionThe study provides an overview of stakeholders’ perceived barriers towards vulnerable women’s cervical cancer screening participation in seven European countries. The organisation of healthcare systems and the maturity of screening programmes differ between countries, while vulnerable women’s psychological barriers had several similarities.

ObjectiveThis study explored and compared stakeholder perspectives on enhancements to cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women across seven European countries.DesignIn a series of Collaborative User Boards, stakeholders were invited to collaborate on identifying facilitators to improve cervical cancer screening.SettingThis study was part of the CBIG-SCREEN project which is funded by the European Union and targets disparities in cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women (www.cbig-screen.eu). Data collection took place in Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy, Portugal and Romania.ParticipantsRepresented stakeholders at various levels, including user representatives (vulnerable women), healthcare professionals, social workers, programme managers and decision makers.Methods14 meetings lasting 2 hours each were held in these seven countries between October 2021 and June 2022. The meetings were audio or video recorded, transcribed and translated into English for qualitative framework analysis.ResultsWe engaged 120 participants in the Collaborative User Boards. Proposed solutions targeted both provider and system levels. In all countries, fostering trusting relationships between vulnerable women and social or healthcare professionals, coupled with community outreach for awareness and access to testing was a consistent recommendation. Participants in Estonia, Denmark, France, Italy, Portugal and Romania advocated for tailoring healthcare services to meet the unique needs of vulnerable populations through a holistic approach. In Bulgaria and Romania, participants advocated for the need to secure free access, from screening to follow-up, and emphasised the need for organised screening with target population screening registries.ConclusionThe study offers insights into stakeholders' recommendations for enhancing cervical cancer screening services for vulnerable women across seven European countries. Despite variations in the implementation level of population-based screening programmes, the imperative to optimise outreach and proximity work to improve cervical cancer screening resonated across all countries.