| Title |
Study protocol for a cluster-randomized trial to compare human papillomavirus based cervical cancer screening in community-health campaigns versus health facilities in western Kenya
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-017-3818-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Megan J. Huchko, James G. Kahn, Jennifer S. Smith, Robert A. Hiatt, Craig R. Cohen, Elizabeth Bukusi |
| Abstract |
Despite guidelines for cervical cancer prevention in low-resource countries, a very small proportion of women in these settings undergo screening, and even fewer women are successfully treated. Using pilot data from western Kenya and World Health Organization recommendations, we developed a protocol to implement evidence-based cervical cancer screening and linkage to treatment strategies to the rural communities. We describe the protocol for a cluster-randomized trial to compare two implementation strategies for human-papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening program using metrics described in the RE-AIM (reach, efficacy, adaption, implementation and maintenance) framework. The study is a three-year, two-phase cluster-randomized trial in 18 communities in western Kenya. During Phase 1, six control communities were offered screening in health facilities; and six intervention communities were offered screening in community health campaigns. Screening was done with human-papillomavirus testing through self-collected specimens. Phase 1 ended and we are working in partnership with communities to further contextualize the implementation strategy for screening, and develop an enhanced linkage to treatment plan. This plan will be tested in an additional six communities in Phase 2 (enhanced intervention). We will compare the reach, efficacy, cost-effectiveness and adaptability of the implementation strategies. Effective low-cost cervical cancer prevention technologies are becoming more widely available in low- and middle-income countries. Despite increasing government support for cervical cancer prevention, there remains a sizeable gap in service availability. We will use implementation science to identify the most effective strategies to fill this gap through development of context-specific evidence-based solutions. This protocol design and results can help guide implementation of cervical cancer screening in similar settings, where women are most underserved and at highest risk for disease. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02124252 . |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 185 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 32 | 17% |
| Researcher | 23 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 31 | 17% |
| Unknown | 71 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 45 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 27 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 3% |
| Engineering | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 7% |
| Unknown | 78 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,485,255
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#4,154
of 8,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#266,805
of 439,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#93
of 179 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,989 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 179 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.