IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i4p1721-d497318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenges in the Prevention of Cervical Cancer in Romania

Author

Listed:
  • Raluca Dania Todor

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences and Business Administration, Department of Marketing, Tourism Services and International Affairs, Transilvania University of Braşov, Colina Universității Street, no. 1, Building A, Braşov 500068, Romania)

  • Gabriel Bratucu

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences and Business Administration, Department of Marketing, Tourism Services and International Affairs, Transilvania University of Braşov, Colina Universității Street, no. 1, Building A, Braşov 500068, Romania)

  • Marius Alexandru Moga

    (Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Transilvania University of Braşov, B-dul Eroilor 29, 500036 Brașov, Romania)

  • Adina Nicoleta Candrea

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences and Business Administration, Department of Marketing, Tourism Services and International Affairs, Transilvania University of Braşov, Colina Universității Street, no. 1, Building A, Braşov 500068, Romania)

  • Luigi Geo Marceanu

    (Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Transilvania University of Braşov, B-dul Eroilor 29, 500036 Brașov, Romania)

  • Costin Vlad Anastasiu

    (Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Transilvania University of Braşov, B-dul Eroilor 29, 500036 Brașov, Romania)

Abstract

Approximately every two hours, a Romanian woman is diagnosed with cervical cancer as the country ranks first in the EU in terms of its mortality rate. This paper aims to identify the main reasons that have led to this situation. First, a study based on secondary data was conducted in order to identify measures taken by the Romanian Ministry of Health for the prevention of this type of cancer. Second, a quantitative study was conducted to evaluate the impact that exposure to information and awareness campaigns has on women’s behavior regarding cervical cancer prevention through screening. The results of the research show an increased percentage of the women understanding the importance of screening and the benefits of early diagnosis, but also shows that a high percentage of women postpone the routine checks due to lack of time and financial resources. The research results also indicate that the only free screening program implemented in Romania during 2012–2017 was a failure due to poor procedures, low number of women tested, underfunding and the lack of promotion. Our conclusion is that the Romanian Ministry of Health has to take immediate action by conducting major awareness campaigns and also by implementing functional screening programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Raluca Dania Todor & Gabriel Bratucu & Marius Alexandru Moga & Adina Nicoleta Candrea & Luigi Geo Marceanu & Costin Vlad Anastasiu, 2021. "Challenges in the Prevention of Cervical Cancer in Romania," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-14, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1721-:d:497318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1721/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1721/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Todorova, Irina L.G. & Baban, Adriana & Balabanova, Dina & Panayotova, Yulia & Bradley, Janet, 2006. "Providers' constructions of the role of women in cervical cancer screening in Bulgaria and Romania," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 776-787, August.
    2. Irina Todorova & Adriana Baban & Anna Alexandrova-Karamanova & Janet Bradley, 2009. "Inequalities in cervical cancer screening in Eastern Europe: perspectives from Bulgaria and Romania," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 54(4), pages 222-232, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephen Hinchliffe & Mark A. Jackson & Katrina Wyatt & Anne E. Barlow & Manuela Barreto & Linda Clare & Michael H. Depledge & Robin Durie & Lora E. Fleming & Nick Groom & Karyn Morrissey & Laura Salis, 2018. "Healthy publics: enabling cultures and environments for health," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Trude Andreassen & Adriana Melnic & Rejane Figueiredo & Kåre Moen & Ofelia Şuteu & Florian Nicula & Giske Ursin & Elisabete Weiderpass, 2018. "Attendance to cervical cancer screening among Roma and non-Roma women living in North-Western region of Romania," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 63(5), pages 609-619, June.
    3. Kirstin Scott & John Powles & Hilary Thomas & Boika Rechel, 2011. "Perceived barriers to the development of modern public health in Bulgaria: a qualitative study," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 56(2), pages 191-199, April.
    4. Brittany McKinnon & Sam Harper & Spencer Moore, 2011. "Decomposing income-related inequality in cervical screening in 67 countries," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 56(2), pages 139-152, April.
    5. Teresa Janevic & Janko Jankovic & Elizabeth Bradley, 2012. "Socioeconomic position, gender, and inequalities in self-rated health between Roma and non-Roma in Serbia," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 57(1), pages 49-55, February.
    6. Andreassen, Trude & Weiderpass, Elisabete & Nicula, Florian & Suteu, Ofelia & Itu, Andreea & Bumbu, Minodora & Tincu, Aida & Ursin, Giske & Moen, Kåre, 2017. "Controversies about cervical cancer screening: A qualitative study of Roma women's (non)participation in cervical cancer screening in Romania," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 48-55.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1721-:d:497318. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.