Skip to main content
. 2024 Jun 13;18:1713. doi: 10.3332/ecancer.2024.1713

Table 3. Facilitators to cervical cancer screening among WRA in rural Kisumu County.

Facilitators Intervention Control
Baseline
(n = 52)
Endline
(n = 77)
p-value Baseline
(n = 53)
Endline
(n = 57)
p-value
Health talk by CHV 10 (19.2) 28 (36.4) 0.036 19 (35.9) 21 (36.8) 0.914
Advert from the media 8 (15.4) 12 (15.6) 0.975 1 (1.9) 1 (1.8) 0.959
Advice from health professionals 38 (73.1) 45 (58.4) 0.089 36 (67.9) 40 (70.2) 0.799
Advice from a friend or relative 5 (9.6) 10 (13.0) 0.558 2 (3.8) 2 (3.5) 0.941
Personal decision 1 (1.9) 1 (1.4) 0.639 0 0 Null
IUCD insertion 0 0 0.776 1 (1.9) 0 Null
Had infection in the private part 10 (19.2) 0 0.649 0 0 Null
Personal decision 8 (15.4) 1 (1.3) 0.688 1 (1.9) 1 (1.7) 0.639
Experienced pain in the genitals 38 (73.1) 1 (1.3) 0.649 0 0 Null

Data are numbers (proportion). Denominator is the number of respondents who reported to have been screened for cervical cancer. Statistical significance is reported at p ≤ 0.05. Null is where no observations were made across the two timelines. Bold is statistically significant.