Cited by 49Women's cancer prevention and managementCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchHealth Policy Implementation Science

An exploration of opportunities and challenges facing cervical cancer managers in Kenya

Open access
Kivuti-Bitok, Lucy W, Pokhariyal, Ganesh P, Abdul, Roudsari, McDonnell, Geoff·2013·BMC Research Notes

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Kenya like other developing countries is low in resource setting and is facing a number of challenges in the management of cervical cancer. This study documents opportunities and challenges encountered in managing cervical cancer from the health care workers' perspectives. A qualitative study was conducted among cervical cancer managers who were defined as nurses and doctors involved in operational level management of cervical cancer. The respondents were drawn from four provincial hospitals and the only two main National public referral hospitals in Kenya. Twenty one [21] nurse managers and twelve [12] medical doctors were interviewed using a standardized interview guide. The responses were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and the content analyzed in emerging themes. FINDINGS: Four themes were identified. Patient related challenges included a large number of patients, presenting in the late stage of disease, low levels of knowledge on cancer of the cervix, low levels of screening and a poor attitude towards screening procedure. Individual health care providers identified a lack of specialised training, difficulty in disclosure of diagnosis to patients, a poor attitude towards cervical cancer screening procedure and a poor attitude towards cervical cancer patients. Health facilities were lacking in infrastructure and medical supplies. Some managers felt ill-equipped in technological skills while the majority lacked access to the internet. Mobile phones were identified as having great potential for improving the management of cervical cancer in Kenya. CONCLUSION: Kenya faces a myriad of challenges in the management of cervical cancer. The peculiar negative attitude towards screening procedure and the negative attitude of some managers towards cervical cancer patients need urgent attention. The potential use of mobile phones in cervical cancer management should be explored.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1756-0500-6-136

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 19 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Denny L Quinn M Sankaranarayanan R Screening for cervical cancer in developing countries Vaccine 2006 24 S3 S3/71–S3/77 16950020
  2. Mutyaba T Faxelid E Mirembe F Weiderpass E Influences on uptake of reproductive health services in Nsangi community of Uganda and their implications for cervical cancer screening Reprod Heal 2007 June 26 PMC1936416 17594474

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kivuti-Bitok, L. W., Pokhariyal, G. P., Abdul, R., & McDonnell, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Nairobi (KE)
  • University of Victoria (CA)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Kivuti-Bitok, Lucy W
Venue
BMC Research Notes
Published
2013-04-08
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
136-136
ISSN
1756-0500 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2121895081
Cited by
48
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Research Notes (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
National Commission for Science and Technology
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
cervical cancer management, cervical cancer screening, health managers, doctors and nurses, attitudes toward screening, late-stage presentation, health facility infrastructure, Kenya
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Attitude to Health, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Communication, Cultural Characteristics, Developing Countries, Female, Health Promotion, Health Services Needs and Demand, Humans, Kenya, Male, Mass Screening, Professional-Patient Relations, Surveys and Questionnaires, Disease Management, Cell Phone, Early Detection of Cancer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review