Navigating the risks: Stakeholder views on risk-based cervical cancer screening.

IF 2.9 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2025-03-05 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0317986
Maali-Liina Remmel, Kadri Suija, Anna Markina, Anna Tisler, Anda Ķīvīte-Urtāne, Mindaugas Stankūnas, Mari Nygård, Gunvor Aasbø, Laura Maļina, Anneli Uusküla
{"title":"Navigating the risks: Stakeholder views on risk-based cervical cancer screening.","authors":"Maali-Liina Remmel, Kadri Suija, Anna Markina, Anna Tisler, Anda Ķīvīte-Urtāne, Mindaugas Stankūnas, Mari Nygård, Gunvor Aasbø, Laura Maļina, Anneli Uusküla","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0317986","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The development of risk-based cancer screening programs requires a paradigm shift in existing practices and healthcare policies. Therefore, it is crucial to not only assess the effectiveness of new technologies and risk prediction models but also to analyze the acceptability of such programs among healthcare stakeholders. This study aims to assess the acceptability of risk-based cervical cancer screening (RB CCS) in Estonia from the perspectives of relevant stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews with healthcare policy and service level stakeholders in Estonia. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability guided the interview design, and the findings were charted using framework analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>17 interviews were conducted with stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, cancer registry representatives, technology specialists, policymakers, and health insurance providers. While stakeholders generally supported the concept and potential benefits of RB CCS, recognizing its capacity to improve screening outcomes and resource allocation, they raised significant concerns about feasibility, complexity, and ethical challenges. Doubts were expressed about the readiness of the healthcare system and population, particularly the current health information system's capacity to support risk-based approaches. The need for evidence-based and internationally validated screening models, comprehensive public communication, provider training, and collaborative discussions involving all relevant parties, including the public, was emphasized.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The favorable attitude towards RB CCS among stakeholders provides a strong foundation for advancing its development. However, a comprehensive strategy emphasizing the generation of robust evidence, strengthening healthcare infrastructure, prioritizing patient empowerment, and cultivating a collaborative environment built on trust is crucial.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"20 3","pages":"e0317986"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882054/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317986","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The development of risk-based cancer screening programs requires a paradigm shift in existing practices and healthcare policies. Therefore, it is crucial to not only assess the effectiveness of new technologies and risk prediction models but also to analyze the acceptability of such programs among healthcare stakeholders. This study aims to assess the acceptability of risk-based cervical cancer screening (RB CCS) in Estonia from the perspectives of relevant stakeholders.

Methods and materials: This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews with healthcare policy and service level stakeholders in Estonia. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability guided the interview design, and the findings were charted using framework analysis based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

Results: 17 interviews were conducted with stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, cancer registry representatives, technology specialists, policymakers, and health insurance providers. While stakeholders generally supported the concept and potential benefits of RB CCS, recognizing its capacity to improve screening outcomes and resource allocation, they raised significant concerns about feasibility, complexity, and ethical challenges. Doubts were expressed about the readiness of the healthcare system and population, particularly the current health information system's capacity to support risk-based approaches. The need for evidence-based and internationally validated screening models, comprehensive public communication, provider training, and collaborative discussions involving all relevant parties, including the public, was emphasized.

Conclusion: The favorable attitude towards RB CCS among stakeholders provides a strong foundation for advancing its development. However, a comprehensive strategy emphasizing the generation of robust evidence, strengthening healthcare infrastructure, prioritizing patient empowerment, and cultivating a collaborative environment built on trust is crucial.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信