Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Cervical Cancer Screening Among Marginalized Women: A Cross-Sectional Intervention Study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Cervical Cancer Screening Among Marginalized Women: A Cross-Sectional Intervention Study
Do you wish to request the book?
Cervical Cancer Screening Among Marginalized Women: A Cross-Sectional Intervention Study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Cervical Cancer Screening Among Marginalized Women: A Cross-Sectional Intervention Study
2021
Overview
Many countries organize population-based cervical cancer screening programs (CSP). In the Netherlands, eligible women are invited by mail. Marginalized women living in unstable conditions and homeless women often fail to receive the invitation letter. These women also experience access barriers to regular healthcare. Consequently, despite presumably being at higher risk of developing cervical cancer due to prevalent risk factors, marginalized women are rarely screened for cervical cancer. The aim of the study was to identify the prevalence of (pre)cancerous abnormalities among marginalized women, and subsequently explore invitation approaches to enhance their screening participation.
A cross-sectional intervention study was conducted in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Between February and May 2019, marginalized women aged 20-60 years were invited to participate in cervical screening. A participant was considered screen-positive when they tested positive for high-risk human papilloma virus (HR-HPV) and showed cytological abnormalities. Data of the study population were compared with regional data of the Dutch CSP. Various invitation approaches were used to recruit women.
Out of 74 included women, 12 participants (16%) were found screen-positive, against 3.4% in women screened by the Dutch CSP. The prevalence ratio for the study population was 4.4 (95% CI 1.9-8.6) compared with women screened by the Dutch CSP. Using a direct, pro-active approach resulted in participation of 92% of the included women.
Marginalized women have an increased risk of (pre)cancerous cervical abnormalities in screening, compared with women screened by the Dutch CSP. A direct pro-active approach was the most effective to stimulate screening participation. Enhancement of screening uptake for this population needs special effort.
