IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0141679.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Influence of Spirituality and Modesty on Acceptance of Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening

Author

Listed:
  • Eileen O Dareng
  • Elima Jedy-Agba
  • Patience Bamisaye
  • Fatima Isa Modibbo
  • Lawal O Oyeneyin
  • Ayodele S Adewole
  • Olayinka B Olaniyan
  • Patrick S Dakum
  • Paul D Pharoah
  • Clement A Adebamowo

Abstract

Introduction: Whereas systematic screening programs have reduced the incidence of cervical cancer in developed countries, the incidence remains high in developing countries. Among several barriers to uptake of cervical cancer screening, the roles of religious and cultural factors such as modesty have been poorly studied. Knowledge about these factors is important because of the potential to overcome them using strategies such as self-collection of cervico-vaginal samples. In this study we evaluate the influence of spirituality and modesty on the acceptance of self-sampling for cervical cancer screening. Methodology: We enrolled 600 participants in Nigeria between August and October 2014 and collected information on spirituality and modesty using two scales. We used principal component analysis to extract scores for spirituality and modesty and logistic regression models to evaluate the association between spirituality, modesty and preference for self-sampling. All analyses were performed using STATA 12 (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, USA). Results: Some 581 (97%) women had complete data for analysis. Most (69%) were married, 50% were Christian and 44% were from the south western part of Nigeria. Overall, 19% (110/581) of the women preferred self-sampling to being sampled by a health care provider. Adjusting for age and socioeconomic status, spirituality, religious affiliation and geographic location were significantly associated with preference for self-sampling, while modesty was not significantly associated. The multivariable OR (95% CI, p-value) for association with self-sampling were 0.88 (0.78–0.99, 0.03) for spirituality, 1.69 (1.09–2.64, 0.02) for religious affiliation and 0.96 (0.86–1.08, 0.51) for modesty. Conclusion: Our results show the importance of taking cultural and religious beliefs and practices into consideration in planning health interventions like cervical cancer screening. To succeed, public health interventions and the education to promote it must be related to the target population and its preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Eileen O Dareng & Elima Jedy-Agba & Patience Bamisaye & Fatima Isa Modibbo & Lawal O Oyeneyin & Ayodele S Adewole & Olayinka B Olaniyan & Patrick S Dakum & Paul D Pharoah & Clement A Adebamowo, 2015. "Influence of Spirituality and Modesty on Acceptance of Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0141679
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0141679
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0141679
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0141679&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0141679?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0141679. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.