Knowledge, attitudes, practices, and sociocultural factors influencing cervical cancer screening and vaccination among women in rural communities of Gujarat: A mixed-methods study.

IF 1.1 Q4 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-11 DOI:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_505_24
Yogesh Murugan, B M Bhavana, Anurag Ekka, Rohankumar Gandhi, Kishorkumar Muljibhai Dhaduk
{"title":"Knowledge, attitudes, practices, and sociocultural factors influencing cervical cancer screening and vaccination among women in rural communities of Gujarat: A mixed-methods study.","authors":"Yogesh Murugan, B M Bhavana, Anurag Ekka, Rohankumar Gandhi, Kishorkumar Muljibhai Dhaduk","doi":"10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_505_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cervical cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality among women in India. Screening can help in early detection and improve outcomes. However, uptake remains low, especially in rural areas. Understanding multidimensional factors influencing screening in local contexts is essential to promote equitable access. This study examined knowledge, attitudes, practices, and sociocultural factors associated with cervical cancer screening and vaccination in rural India.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed methods study was conducted among 400 women aged 18-60 years in rural Maharashtra. Quantitative data were collected on knowledge, attitudes, and screening practices by using a structured questionnaire. Qualitative data were gathered through in-depth interviews with 30 participants on perspectives influencing screening. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Thematic analysis was done for qualitative data. The integration provided complementary insights.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Quantitative results showed poor knowledge (17% had good knowledge) and positive attitudes (64%) but low screening uptake (9%). Qualitative findings revealed limited awareness, stigma around gynecological exams, gender inequities, fear, fatalism, and low prioritization of self-care as screening barriers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Multifaceted strategies addressing knowledge gaps, gender roles, stigma, and access are required to improve cervical cancer screening in marginalized rural communities. Mixed methods provide comprehensive evidence for designing context-specific interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":15856,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11504776/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_505_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cervical cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality among women in India. Screening can help in early detection and improve outcomes. However, uptake remains low, especially in rural areas. Understanding multidimensional factors influencing screening in local contexts is essential to promote equitable access. This study examined knowledge, attitudes, practices, and sociocultural factors associated with cervical cancer screening and vaccination in rural India.

Methods: A mixed methods study was conducted among 400 women aged 18-60 years in rural Maharashtra. Quantitative data were collected on knowledge, attitudes, and screening practices by using a structured questionnaire. Qualitative data were gathered through in-depth interviews with 30 participants on perspectives influencing screening. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Thematic analysis was done for qualitative data. The integration provided complementary insights.

Results: Quantitative results showed poor knowledge (17% had good knowledge) and positive attitudes (64%) but low screening uptake (9%). Qualitative findings revealed limited awareness, stigma around gynecological exams, gender inequities, fear, fatalism, and low prioritization of self-care as screening barriers.

Conclusion: Multifaceted strategies addressing knowledge gaps, gender roles, stigma, and access are required to improve cervical cancer screening in marginalized rural communities. Mixed methods provide comprehensive evidence for designing context-specific interventions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
影响古吉拉特邦农村社区妇女宫颈癌筛查和疫苗接种的知识、态度、做法和社会文化因素:一项混合方法研究。
背景:宫颈癌是印度妇女癌症死亡的主要原因。筛查有助于早期发现并改善预后。然而,接受筛查的人数仍然很少,尤其是在农村地区。了解当地影响筛查的多方面因素对于促进公平筛查至关重要。本研究探讨了与印度农村地区宫颈癌筛查和疫苗接种相关的知识、态度、实践和社会文化因素:方法:对马哈拉施特拉邦农村地区 400 名 18-60 岁的妇女进行了一项混合方法研究。通过结构化问卷收集了有关知识、态度和筛查做法的定量数据。通过对 30 名参与者进行深入访谈,收集有关影响筛查的观点的定性数据。定量数据采用描述性统计和逻辑回归进行分析。对定性数据进行了主题分析。结果:定量结果显示,对筛查的了解程度较低(17% 的人了解较多),态度积极(64%),但接受筛查的比例较低(9%)。定性结果显示,筛查障碍包括认识有限、妇科检查的耻辱感、性别不平等、恐惧、宿命论以及自我保健的优先级低:结论:要改善边缘化农村社区的宫颈癌筛查工作,需要采取多方面的策略来解决知识差距、性别角色、耻辱感和获取途径等问题。混合方法为设计针对具体情况的干预措施提供了全面的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
7.10%
发文量
884
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊最新文献
"Am I really fat/thin?!" Self-perceived body image and correlation with nutritional status among medical students in Central Gujarat. A clinical comparative study on carbamylated haemoglobin as a surrogate marker to differentiate acute kidney injury from chronic kidney disease. A clinical study of rhino-orbital-cerebral mucormycosis during the COVID-19 pandemic in western Maharashtra. A community-based study on health seeking behaviour among NCD patients in rural and urban Tamil Nadu - A convergent mixed method study. A cross-sectional survey of ocular problems after COVID-19 infection among healthcare workers at a teaching hospital.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1