Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39553070›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

A Comprehensive Model for Understanding Breast Cancer Screening Hesitancy: Integrating the Health Belief Model and the Confidence, Convenience, Complacency, Constraints, and Risk and Responsibility Calculations (5C) Model.

Yang Liao, Suhaily Mohd Hairon, Najib Majdi Yaacob, Li Luo, Tengku Alina Tengku Ismail

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yang LiaoDepartment of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, MYS.
Suhaily Mohd HaironDepartment of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, MYS.
Najib Majdi YaacobBiostatistics and Research Methodology Unit, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, MYS.
Li LuoDepartment of Oncology, Guihang Guiyang Hospital, Guiyang, CHN.
Tengku Alina Tengku IsmailDepartment of Community Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, MYS.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer screening (BCS) is a critical preventive measure that can significantly reduce mortality rates. Despite its importance, screening hesitancy remains a global issue. This paper showcases the combination of the Health Belief Model (HBM) and the 5C Model and how it provides a more holistic understanding of BCS hesitancy. The first model, HBM, is a well-regarded tool that collects data based on individual beliefs such as perceived susceptibility, severity, benefits, barriers, cues to action, and self-efficacy. The second model, the 5C Model, stands for confidence, convenience, complacency, constraints, and risk and responsibility calculations. This model adds a layer of environmental considerations that HBM lacks. By combining these models, we can identify the key psychological, social, and structural barriers that contribute to BCS hesitancy. Furthermore, analysis of the literature suggests that enhancing trust in healthcare systems, increasing accessibility and affordability of screening, addressing cultural and social stigmas, and promoting a sense of collective responsibility can significantly improve screening participation rates, which are reflected in the models.

Indexed as

5c modelbarriersbreast cancer screeninghealth belief modelhesitancy

Identifiers

PMID39553070
PMCPMC11565091

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.