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.
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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling breast cancer screening hesitancy among Chinese women: integrating the Knowledge-Attitude-Practice, health belief, and 5 C frameworks.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Psychometric validation of a knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) scale for breast cancer screening among Chinese women.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Psychometric validation of a culturally adapted health belief model scale for breast cancer screening in Chinese women.PloS one · 2025Article
- Exploring Theoretical Models and Frameworks Used to Explain Factors Influencing Breast Cancer Screening Participation: A Scoping Review.International journal of women's health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.