ArticleBMC public health2026
Modeling breast cancer screening hesitancy among Chinese women: integrating the Knowledge-Attitude-Practice, health belief, and 5 C frameworks.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer screening hesitancy remains a major public health concern in China, where institutional screening resources are unevenly distributed. Breast self-examination is a simple, low-cost method suitable for resource-limited settings, yet participation remains suboptimal. Previous studies have predominantly focused on knowledge and beliefs in isolation, with limited integration of broader psychological constructs. This study examined psychological mechanisms by integrating the Knowledge-Attitude-Practice framework, the Health Belief Model, and a 5 C hesitancy model.
methodsA multistage cross-sectional survey of 849 Chinese women aged 18-70 years in Guizhou Province used three validated instruments: a 19-item Knowledge-Attitude-Practice questionnaire, a 22-item HBM scale, and a 20-item 5 C hesitancy scales. Structural equation modeling (SEM) assessed direct and mediated pathways among knowledge, practice, health beliefs, and hesitancy. Moderation analyses and multi-group invariance tests evaluated psychosocial and sociodemographic influences.
resultsThe item-level structural equation model demonstrated acceptable fit (CFI = 0.938, TLI = 0.934, RMSEA = 0.069, SRMR = 0.085). Knowledge and practice were significantly associated with Health Belief Model constructs, which subsequently showed distinct patterns of association with the five dimensions of the 5 C framework. The model demonstrated adequate explanatory capacity for key belief- and hesitancy-related constructs. Moderation analyses indicated that several structural relationships varied by self-efficacy, income, and education. Multi-group structural equation modeling supported structural invariance across demographic groups.
conclusionSelf-efficacy, perceived barriers, and cues to action were the strongest determinants of BSE hesitancy. The integrative KAP-HBM-5 C framework clarified the cognitive-belief-motivation pathways linking knowledge and practice to screening behavior. These findings highlight potential psychological leverage points for future intervention development, particularly with respect to strengthening self-efficacy, reducing perceived barriers, and enhancing actionable cues to promote sustainable screening behavior in community settings.
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.