ArticlePloS one2024
Validation and usability of SeDAR e-health video for enhancing cervical cancer screening.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe cervical cancer (CC) incidence rate is increasing among young women aged <50 years despite early screening is proven effective. Electronic health (e-health) has great potential for disseminating health education.
methodsThis study validated a newly developed e-health tool "SeDAR®" and assessed its usability via evaluations by health experts (HE), media experts (ME), and women. The SeDAR® content was developed based on protection motivation theory (PMT) using the nominal group technique and in-depth interviews that involved HE and women, respectively. Content validation was performed among the HE (n = 12) and ME (n = 5) using the content validation index (CVI) to identify their agreement. Subsequently, the Video Engagement Scale (VES®) was used to validate SeDAR® among women of different ethnicities (n = 11) to achieve ecological validity. The experts and women also commented on the presentation of the video.
resultsThe validation yielded a good CVI among the HE (scale-level CVI-average [SCVI/Ave] = 0.986; scale-level CVI-universal agreement [SCVI/UA] = 0.900) and ME (SCVI/Ave = 0.979, SCVI/UA = 0.897). The highest VES® score [mean (±SD) = 92.90(±3.46)] proved the ecological validity of SeDAR®. The experts' feedback established that SeDAR® conveyed a clear message about awareness of performing CC screening and was suitable for public viewing. The women considered SeDAR® easy to understand, and it advised early exposure for early CC screening.
conclusionsSeDAR® was valid and could constitute an important e-health tool to improve motivation and uptake of CC screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.