MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283643131 · doi:10.2196/32089

The Effects of Theory-Based Educational Intervention and WhatsApp Follow-up on Papanicolaou Smear Uptake Among Postnatal Women in Malaysia: Randomized Controlled Trial

2022· article· en· W4283643131 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zaahirah Mohammad, Norliza Ahmad, Anisah Baharom

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialCervical cancerIntervention (counseling)Papanicolaou stainFamily medicineGynecologyCancerNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Despite the availability and accessibility of free Papanicolaou (Pap) smear as a screening tool for cervical cancer, the uptake of Pap smear in Malaysia has not changed in the last 15 years. Previous studies have shown that the high uptake of Pap smear reduces the mortality rate of patients with cervical cancer. The low uptake of Pap smear is multifactorial, and the problem could be minimized through the use of mobile technologies. Nevertheless, most intervention studies focused on individual factors, while other important aspects such as mobile technologies, especially WhatsApp, have not been investigated yet. Objective This study aims to determine the effects of a theory-based educational intervention and WhatsApp follow-up (Pap smear uptake [PSU] intervention) in improving PSU among postnatal women in Seremban, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. Methods A 2-arm, parallel single-blind cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted among postpartum women from the Seremban district. Twelve health clinics were randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups. At baseline, both groups received a self-administered questionnaire. The intervention group received standard care and PSU intervention delivered by a researcher. This 2-stage intervention module was developed based on Social Cognitive Theory, where the first stage was conducted face-to-face and the second stage included a WhatsApp follow-up. The control group received standard care. Participants were observed immediately and at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after the intervention. The primary endpoint was PSU, whereas the secondary endpoints were knowledge, attitude, and self-efficacy scores for Pap smear screening self-assessed using a Google Forms questionnaire. A generalized mixed model was used to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. All data were analyzed using IBM SPSS (version 25), and P value of .05 was considered statistically significant. Results We analyzed 401 women, of whom 76 (response rate: 325/401, 81%) had withdrawn because of the COVID-19 pandemic, with a total of 162 respondents in the intervention group and 163 respondents in the control group. The proportion of Pap smears at the 12-week follow-up was 67.9% (110/162) in the intervention group versus 39.8% (65/163) in the control group (P<.001). Significant differences between the intervention and control groups were found for Pap smear use (F4,1178; P<.001), knowledge scores (F4,1172=14.946; P<.001), attitude scores (F4,1172=24.417; P<.001), and self-efficacy scores (F1,1172=10.432; P<.001). Conclusions This study demonstrated that the PSU intervention is effective in increasing the uptake of Pap smear among postnatal women in Seremban district, Malaysia. This intervention module can be tested in other populations of women. Trial Registration Thai Clinical Trials Registry TCTR20200205001; https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/show/TCTR20200205001

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207