Cargando…
Eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol
BACKGROUND: With the accumulation of evidence regarding potential harms of cancer screening in recent years, researchers, policy-makers, and the public are becoming more critical of population-based cancer screening. Consequently, a high-quality cancer screening program should consider individuals’...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4982264/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27516072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0310-9 |
_version_ | 1782447750560874496 |
---|---|
author | Wood, Brianne Van Katwyk, Susan Rogers El-Khatib, Ziad McFaul, Susan Taljaard, Monica Wright, Erica Graham, Ian D. Little, Julian |
author_facet | Wood, Brianne Van Katwyk, Susan Rogers El-Khatib, Ziad McFaul, Susan Taljaard, Monica Wright, Erica Graham, Ian D. Little, Julian |
author_sort | Wood, Brianne |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: With the accumulation of evidence regarding potential harms of cancer screening in recent years, researchers, policy-makers, and the public are becoming more critical of population-based cancer screening. Consequently, a high-quality cancer screening program should consider individuals’ values and preferences when determining recommendations. In cervical cancer screening, offering women autonomy is considered a “person-centered” approach to health care services; however, it may impact the effectiveness of the program should women choose to not participate. As part of a larger project to investigate women’s cervical screening preferences and correlates of these preferences, this systematic review will capture quantitative and qualitative investigations of women’s cervical screening preferences and the methods used to elicit them. DESIGN AND METHODS: This mixed methods synthesis will use a thematic analysis approach to synthesize qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods evidence. This protocol describes the methods that will be used in this investigation. A search strategy has been developed with a health librarian and peer reviewed using PRESS. Based on this strategy, five databases and the gray literature will be searched for studies that meet the inclusion criteria. The quality of the included individual studies will be examined using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Three reviewers will extract data from the primary studies on the tools or instruments used to elicit women’s preferences regarding cervical cancer screening, theoretical frameworks used, outcomes measured, the outstanding themes from quantitative and qualitative evidence, and the identified preferences for cervical cancer screening. We will describe the relationships between study results and the study population, “intervention” (e.g., tool or instrument), and context. We will follow the PRISMA reporting guideline. We will compare findings across studies and between study methods (e.g., qualitative versus quantitative study designs). The strength of the synthesized findings will be assessed using the validated GRADE and CERQual tool. DISCUSSION: This review will inform the development of a tool to elicit women’s cervical screening preferences. Understanding the methods used to elicit women’s preferences and what is known about women’s cervical screening preferences will be useful for guideline developers who wish to incorporate a woman-centered approach specifically for cervical screening guidelines. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016035737 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0310-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4982264 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49822642016-08-13 Eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol Wood, Brianne Van Katwyk, Susan Rogers El-Khatib, Ziad McFaul, Susan Taljaard, Monica Wright, Erica Graham, Ian D. Little, Julian Syst Rev Protocol BACKGROUND: With the accumulation of evidence regarding potential harms of cancer screening in recent years, researchers, policy-makers, and the public are becoming more critical of population-based cancer screening. Consequently, a high-quality cancer screening program should consider individuals’ values and preferences when determining recommendations. In cervical cancer screening, offering women autonomy is considered a “person-centered” approach to health care services; however, it may impact the effectiveness of the program should women choose to not participate. As part of a larger project to investigate women’s cervical screening preferences and correlates of these preferences, this systematic review will capture quantitative and qualitative investigations of women’s cervical screening preferences and the methods used to elicit them. DESIGN AND METHODS: This mixed methods synthesis will use a thematic analysis approach to synthesize qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods evidence. This protocol describes the methods that will be used in this investigation. A search strategy has been developed with a health librarian and peer reviewed using PRESS. Based on this strategy, five databases and the gray literature will be searched for studies that meet the inclusion criteria. The quality of the included individual studies will be examined using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Three reviewers will extract data from the primary studies on the tools or instruments used to elicit women’s preferences regarding cervical cancer screening, theoretical frameworks used, outcomes measured, the outstanding themes from quantitative and qualitative evidence, and the identified preferences for cervical cancer screening. We will describe the relationships between study results and the study population, “intervention” (e.g., tool or instrument), and context. We will follow the PRISMA reporting guideline. We will compare findings across studies and between study methods (e.g., qualitative versus quantitative study designs). The strength of the synthesized findings will be assessed using the validated GRADE and CERQual tool. DISCUSSION: This review will inform the development of a tool to elicit women’s cervical screening preferences. Understanding the methods used to elicit women’s preferences and what is known about women’s cervical screening preferences will be useful for guideline developers who wish to incorporate a woman-centered approach specifically for cervical screening guidelines. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016035737 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0310-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-08-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4982264/ /pubmed/27516072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0310-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Protocol Wood, Brianne Van Katwyk, Susan Rogers El-Khatib, Ziad McFaul, Susan Taljaard, Monica Wright, Erica Graham, Ian D. Little, Julian Eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol |
title | Eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol |
title_full | Eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol |
title_fullStr | Eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol |
title_short | Eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol |
title_sort | eliciting women’s cervical screening preferences: a mixed methods systematic review protocol |
topic | Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4982264/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27516072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0310-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT woodbrianne elicitingwomenscervicalscreeningpreferencesamixedmethodssystematicreviewprotocol AT vankatwyksusanrogers elicitingwomenscervicalscreeningpreferencesamixedmethodssystematicreviewprotocol AT elkhatibziad elicitingwomenscervicalscreeningpreferencesamixedmethodssystematicreviewprotocol AT mcfaulsusan elicitingwomenscervicalscreeningpreferencesamixedmethodssystematicreviewprotocol AT taljaardmonica elicitingwomenscervicalscreeningpreferencesamixedmethodssystematicreviewprotocol AT wrighterica elicitingwomenscervicalscreeningpreferencesamixedmethodssystematicreviewprotocol AT grahamiand elicitingwomenscervicalscreeningpreferencesamixedmethodssystematicreviewprotocol AT littlejulian elicitingwomenscervicalscreeningpreferencesamixedmethodssystematicreviewprotocol |