<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>0120-5307</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Investigación y Educación en Enfermería]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[Invest. educ. enferm]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>0120-5307</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Imprenta Universidad de Antioquia]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S0120-53072016000100007</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17533/udea.iee.v34n1a07</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Barriers to prevention of cervical cancer in the city of Porto Velho, Rondônia, Brazil]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Barreras en la prevención del cáncer de cuello uterino en Porto Velho, Rondonia, Brasil]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Barreiras à prevenção do câncer de colo uterino no município de Porto Velho, Rondônia, Brasil]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Evangelista Rodrigues]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Daiana]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Alves Moreira]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Kátia Fernanda]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Souza de Oliveira]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Tathiane]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A03"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="A01">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidade Federal de Rondônia -UNIR-  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[ ]]></addr-line>
<country>Brazil</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A02">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidade Federal de Rondônia -UNIR-  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[ ]]></addr-line>
<country>Brazil</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A03">
<institution><![CDATA[,Centro de Pesquisa de Saúde Coletiva-CEPESCO/UNIR  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[ ]]></addr-line>
<country>Brazil</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>04</month>
<year>2016</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>04</month>
<year>2016</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>34</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<fpage>59</fpage>
<lpage>67</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0120-53072016000100007&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S0120-53072016000100007&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S0120-53072016000100007&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[Objective.Identify the related factors with the no adhesion of women in preventive practices of cervical cancer (CC), in a coverage area of a Family Health Team in the city of Porto Velho (Rondônia, Brazil). Methods. Descriptive, cross-sectional study held in 2013. It was applied a questionnaire containing questions related to the health belief model (HBM) of the instrument "Champion's Health Belief Model Scale", validated and culturally adapted to Brazil, to 286 women. Results. 87.7% of women state that they have been submitted to prevention of CC; Regarding the parameters of the HBM, it was found that 74.5% of the women had low scores for the perception of susceptibility to the disease; equal percentage of women had an moderate perception of severity; 52.8% have an moderate perception of the benefits gained from the examination of prevention; and 51.4% have moderate perception of barriers to perform the same test. Conclusion. the process involving the prevention of CC involves the supply of services and availability of skilled professionals. However, the adoption of preventive behavior depends not only on external factors, but also own subjective factors to women.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="es"><p><![CDATA[Objetivo.Identificar los factores relacionados con la no adhesión de las mujeres a las prácticas preventivas del cáncer de cuello uterino (CCU) en el área de cobertura de un Equipo de Salud de la Familia en el Municipio de Porto Velho (Rondonia, Brasil). Métodos. Estudio descriptivo de tipo transversal realizado en 2013. Se aplicó una encuesta compuesta por preguntas referentes al Modelo de Creencias en Salud (MCS) del instrumento "Champion's Health Belief Model Scale", validado y adaptado transculturalmente en Brasil a 286 mujeres. Resultados. El 87.7% de las mujeres afirmó haberse realizado alguna vez en la vida el examen de prevención de CCU. En cuanto a los parámetros del MCS se verificó que el 74.5% de las mujeres obtuvo una baja puntuación en la percepción de susceptibilidad de sufrir la enfermedad; igual porcentaje de mujeres presentaba percepción media de la gravedad; el 52.8% tuvo percepción media de los beneficios obtenidos con la realización del examen de prevención, y el 51.4% poseía percepción media de las barreras para realización del mismo examen. Conclusión. El proceso de la prevención del CCU involucra desde la oferta del servicio hasta la disponibilidad de profesionales cualificados. Sin embargo, la adopción del comportamiento preventivo no depende solamente de factores externos, pues también intervienen factores subjetivos propios de las mujeres.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="pt"><p><![CDATA[Objetivo.Identificar os fatores relacionados com a não adesão de mulheres as práticas preventivas do câncer de colo uterino (CCU), na área de cobertura de uma Equipe de Saúde da Família no Município de Porto Velho (Rondônia, Brasil). Métodos. Estudo descritivo, do tipo transversal realizado em 2013. Aplicou-se um questionário contendo perguntas relacionadas ao modelo de crenças em saúde (MCS) do instrumento "Champion's Health Belief Model Scale", validado e adaptado transculturalmente ao Brasil, a 286 mulheres. Resultados. 87.7% das mulheres afirmaram já ter realizado exame de prevenção do CCU; Quanto aos parâmetros do MCS, verificou-se que 74.5% das mulheres obtiveram pontuação baixa para percepção de susceptibilidade frente a doença; igual percentual das mulheres apresentaram média percepção de gravidade; 52.8% possuem média percepção dos benefícios obtidos com a realização do exame de prevenção; e 51.4% possuem média percepção de barreiras para realização do mesmo exame. Conclusão. O processo envolvendo a prevenção do CCU passa pela oferta dos serviços e disponibilidade de profissionais qualificados. No entanto, a adoção do comportamento preventivo não depende somente de fatores externos, mas também de fatores subjetivos próprios às mulheres.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[woman health]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[uterine cervical neoplasms]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[secondary prevention]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[salud de la mujer]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[neoplasias del cuello uterino]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[prevención secundaria]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="pt"><![CDATA[saúde da mulher]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="pt"><![CDATA[neoplasias do colo do útero]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="pt"><![CDATA[prevenção secundária]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><body><![CDATA[  <font size="2" face="Verdana">  </font>     <p align="right"> <font size="2" face="Verdana"><b>ART&Iacute;CULO ORIGINAL / ORIGINAL ARTICLE/ ARTIGO ORIGINAL</b></font></p>   <font size="2" face="Verdana">    <p align="right">&nbsp; </p> </font>     <p align="right"><font size="2" face="Verdana">doi:<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.17533/udea.iee.v34n1a07" target="_blank">10.17533/udea.iee.v34n1a07</a></font></p> <font size="2" face="Verdana">    <p>&nbsp;</p>      <p align="center"><font size="4" face="Verdana"><b>Barriers to prevention of cervical cancer in the city of Porto Velho, Rond&ocirc;nia, Brazil</b></font></p>     <p align="center">&nbsp;</p>     <p align="center"><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>Barreras en la prevenci&oacute;n del c&aacute;ncer de cuello uterino en Porto Velho, Rondonia, Brasil</b></font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p align="center"><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>Barreiras &agrave; preven&ccedil;&atilde;o do c&acirc;ncer de colo uterino no munic&iacute;pio de Porto Velho, Rond&ocirc;nia, Brasil</b></font></p>      ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>      <p> <b>Daiana Evangelista Rodrigues<sup>1</sup>;K&aacute;tia Fernanda Alves Moreira<sup>2</sup>; Tathiane Souza de Oliveira<sup>3</sup></b></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>      <p> <sup>1</sup>RN, M.Sc. Professor, Universidade Federal de Rond&ocirc;nia -UNIR-, Brazil. email: <a href="mailto:daianaunir@gmail.com" target="_blank">daianaunir@gmail.com</a>.</p>     <p> <sup>2</sup>RN, Ph.D. Professor, UNIR-, Brazil. email: <a href="mailto:katiaunir@gmail.com" target="_blank">katiaunir@gmail.com</a>.</p>     <p> <sup>3</sup>RN. Centro de Pesquisa de Sa&uacute;de Coletiva-CEPESCO/UNIR, Brazil. email: <a href="mailto:tathiane.souza0@gmail.com" target="_blank">tathiane.souza0@gmail.com</a>.</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p> <b>Receipt date: </b>April 29, 2015.  <b>Approval date:</b>September 1, 2015.</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>      ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> <b>Article linked to research: </b>Conhecimento das mulheres a respeito da preven&ccedil;&atilde;o do c&acirc;ncer de colo uterino.</p>     <p><b>Conflicts of interest: </b>none.</p> </font>     <p> <font size="2" face="Verdana"><b>How to cite this article: </b>Rodrigues DE, Moreira KFA, Oliveira TS. Barriers to prevention of cervical cancer in the city of Porto Velho, Rond&ocirc;nia, Brazil. Invest Educ Enferm. 2016; 34(1): 58-66</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p> <font size="2" face="Verdana"><hr noshade>     <p> <b>ABSTRACT</b> </p>     <p><b>Objective.</b>Identify  the related factors with the no adhesion of women in preventive practices of  cervical cancer (CC), in a coverage area of a Family Health Team in the city of  Porto Velho (Rond&ocirc;nia, Brazil). <b>Methods.</b> Descriptive, cross-sectional study held in 2013. It was applied a questionnaire  containing questions related to the health belief model (HBM) of the instrument  "Champion's Health Belief Model Scale", validated and culturally  adapted to Brazil, to 286 women. <b>Results.</b> 87.7% of women state that they have been submitted to prevention of CC;  Regarding the parameters of the HBM, it was found that 74.5% of the women had  low scores for the perception of susceptibility to the disease; equal  percentage of women had an moderate perception of severity; 52.8% have an moderate  perception of the benefits gained from the examination of prevention; and 51.4%  have moderate perception of barriers to perform the same test. <b>Conclusion.</b> the process involving the  prevention of CC involves the supply of services and availability of skilled  professionals. However, the adoption of preventive behavior depends not only on  external factors, but also own subjective factors to women.</p>     <p><b>Key words: </b><i>woman health; uterine cervical neoplasms; secondary prevention.</i></p>  <hr noshade>     <p> <b>RESUMEN</b></p>     <p><b>Objetivo.</b>Identificar los  factores relacionados con la no adhesi&oacute;n de las mujeres a las pr&aacute;cticas  preventivas del c&aacute;ncer de cuello uterino (CCU) en el &aacute;rea de cobertura de un  Equipo de Salud de la Familia en el Municipio de Porto Velho (Rondonia,  Brasil). <b>M&eacute;todos.</b> Estudio  descriptivo de tipo transversal realizado en 2013. Se aplic&oacute; una encuesta  compuesta por preguntas referentes al Modelo de Creencias en Salud (MCS) del  instrumento "<i>Champion's Health Belief  Model Scale</i>", validado y adaptado transculturalmente en Brasil a 286  mujeres. <b>Resultados.</b> El 87.7% de las  mujeres afirm&oacute; haberse realizado alguna vez en la vida el examen de prevenci&oacute;n  de CCU. En cuanto a los par&aacute;metros del MCS se verific&oacute; que el 74.5% de las  mujeres obtuvo una baja puntuaci&oacute;n en la percepci&oacute;n de susceptibilidad de  sufrir la enfermedad; igual porcentaje de mujeres presentaba percepci&oacute;n media  de la gravedad; el 52.8% tuvo&nbsp; percepci&oacute;n  media de los beneficios obtenidos con la realizaci&oacute;n del examen de prevenci&oacute;n,  y el 51.4% pose&iacute;a percepci&oacute;n media de las barreras para realizaci&oacute;n del mismo  examen. <b>Conclusi&oacute;n. </b>El proceso de la  prevenci&oacute;n del CCU involucra desde la oferta del servicio hasta la  disponibilidad de profesionales cualificados. Sin embargo, la adopci&oacute;n del  comportamiento preventivo no depende solamente de factores externos, pues  tambi&eacute;n intervienen factores subjetivos propios de las mujeres.</p>     <p> <b>Palabras clave:</b> <i>salud de la mujer; neoplasias del cuello uterino; prevenci&oacute;n secundaria</i> </p>  <hr noshade>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> <b>RESUMO</b> </p>     <p><b>Objetivo.</b>Identificar os  fatores relacionados com a n&atilde;o ades&atilde;o de mulheres as pr&aacute;ticas preventivas do  c&acirc;ncer de colo uterino (CCU), na &aacute;rea de cobertura de uma Equipe de Sa&uacute;de da  Fam&iacute;lia no Munic&iacute;pio de Porto Velho (Rond&ocirc;nia, Brasil). <b>M&eacute;todos.</b> Estudo descritivo,  do tipo transversal realizado em 2013. Aplicou-se um question&aacute;rio contendo  perguntas relacionadas ao modelo de cren&ccedil;as em sa&uacute;de (MCS) do instrumento "<i>Champion's Health Belief Model Scale</i>",  validado e adaptado transculturalmente ao Brasil, a 286 mulheres. <b>Resultados.</b> 87.7% das mulheres  afirmaram j&aacute; ter realizado exame de preven&ccedil;&atilde;o do CCU; Quanto aos par&acirc;metros do  MCS, verificou-se que 74.5% das mulheres obtiveram pontua&ccedil;&atilde;o baixa para  percep&ccedil;&atilde;o de susceptibilidade frente a doen&ccedil;a; igual percentual das mulheres  apresentaram m&eacute;dia percep&ccedil;&atilde;o de gravidade; 52.8% possuem m&eacute;dia percep&ccedil;&atilde;o dos  benef&iacute;cios obtidos com a realiza&ccedil;&atilde;o do exame de preven&ccedil;&atilde;o; e 51.4% possuem m&eacute;dia  percep&ccedil;&atilde;o de barreiras para realiza&ccedil;&atilde;o do mesmo exame. <b>Conclus&atilde;o.</b> O processo envolvendo a preven&ccedil;&atilde;o do CCU passa pela  oferta dos servi&ccedil;os e disponibilidade de profissionais qualificados. No  entanto, a ado&ccedil;&atilde;o do comportamento preventivo n&atilde;o depende somente de fatores  externos, mas tamb&eacute;m de fatores subjetivos pr&oacute;prios &agrave;s mulheres.</p>     <p><b>Palavras chave:</b><i>sa&uacute;de da mulher; neoplasias do colo do &uacute;tero; preven&ccedil;&atilde;o secund&aacute;ria.</i></p>  <hr noshade>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>      <p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>INTRODUCTION</b> </font></p>     <p>The Cervical Cancer (CC) is considered an important  public health problem in Brazil, and in the north, is the most common cancer in  women, surpassing breast cancer. Infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) is  the most common risk factor, being present in over 95% of cases of cervical  cancer. Others risks factors are related to greater exposure to HPV, but we can  also mention smoking, prolonged use of oral contraceptives and imunossupression.<sup>1-3</sup> This cancer can be prevented with regular Pap smear test of the cervix, also  called Papanicolaou, which has low cost and is able to reduce drastically cases  of invasive cancer. However, the National Institute of Cancer provides data  showing that the state of Rond&ocirc;nia and the City of Porto Velho still have  difficulties in reaching the goals with regard to achieving the screening tests  in the target population.<sup>1</sup></p>     <p>The  Preventive Behavioral Health (PBH) occurs when people anticipate negative  situations for their health, try to avoid them or reduce their impact or detect  a disease in asymptomatic period.<sup>4</sup> The Health Belief Model (HBM) is  done by focusing on the attitudes and beliefs of individuals, which seeks to  explain not only a particular health problem, but can be adapted to others  behavioral problems. In the 1950s, Rosenstock, Hochbaum, Leventhal and Kegells,  social psychologists working in the U.S. Public Health Services presented this  theory to the public health system, to explain the reason for non-adherence to  prevention programs and detection of disease, by individuals.<sup>5</sup> Propositions of the Model of Health Belief state that the behavior depends on  two variables: (1) the desire to avoid the disease or, if already ill, to cure;  (2) the belief that a specific behavior concerning health will prevent or  improve the state of the subject.<sup>5</sup></p>     <p>According  to the HBM, to do a person produce preventive behaviors related to the disease,  she must: To believe that this problem can affect her particularly, considering  susceptible to a health problem (Susceptibility Perception); Realizing the consequences  and repercussions of the severity of health problems, which are inserted in  social relations, work and family (Severity Perception); Believe in the  effectiveness of measures to reduce the possibility of disease (Benefit  Perception); and believe that the decision making will reduce threats, however,  concurrently refers to negative aspects that can jeopardize or impede the  realization of it (Barrier Perception).<sup>6</sup> Perceptions of susceptibility  and severity can be stimulated internally (symptoms) or externally (health  education), which triggers and motivates the individual to act. As referred to  by some authors, issues related to health services, characteristics of the  patient and the professional are aspects that can cause dissatisfaction, pain, boredom,  being on factors that serve as barriers to action and stimulate conflicting  motives of coping. In this aspect, the individual evaluates the costs and  benefits of action before adopting it.<sup>4,5</sup></p>     <p>The  decision on how the individual will behave concerning his health will be  established by the subjective value attributed to each dimension of the HBM  facing the danger or health risk. The vulnerability and severity perceived in threat  or risk situations have preventive force in behavioral decision making in health.<sup>7</sup></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>Faced with such problem this research was conducted  with the objective of study, according to the Health Belief Model, the factors  that may be involved with the non-adherence of women to preventive practices of  cervical cancer, in the coverage area of a family health team in the city of  Porto Velho, Rond&ocirc;nia state, Brazil.</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>METHODOLOGY</b> </font></p>     <p>This is a study with a quantitative, descriptive and  cross-sectional approach. The study was conducted in the city of Porto Velho,  capital of Rond&ocirc;nia state, northern Brazil. Specifically in the Family Health  Team (FHT) Embratel I, Family Health Unit My Little Piece of Ground, in which there  are three family health teams. The relation of women was obtained from the  Primary Care Information System (PCIS), with the base in the year of 2012. The  inclusion criteria were: age 20-59 years of age (because this is the age group  considered by the Ministry of Health for screening cervical cancer until 2013),  having performed or not, earlier, the Pap smear test; be a resident of the area  covered by the family health team; have cognitive ability that enabled the  interview and who agreed to participate in the study. Women under 20 years of  age or over 59 years and who have had cervical cancer were excluded.</p>     <p>From the PCIS record, it was found that there are 800  women in the area of coverage and age group of interest for this study. To  calculate the sample the following parameters were used: error of 5.0%;  confidence level of 95.0% and an estimated prevalence of 50.0%, which is what  determines the larger sample size. From these parameters, were found a total of  260 subjects for composition of the sample. Calculation performed by the  software Statcalc of the Epi Info, version 6.0. Anticipating the possibility of  losses in the process, we worked with a 10% increase which totaled 286  interviews.</p>     <p>The sample was stratified according to the micro area of  residence within the proposed territory. The selection of participants happened  upon systematic random selection of households that would be visited. The study  was conducted by applying forms formed by closed questions during the months  from March to September, 2013.</p>     <p>The third part of the form consisted of questions  regarding the Health Belief Model (HBM), constituting the form "Champion's  Health Belief Model Scale" (CHBMS), validated and culturally adapted to  Brazil. In this study were used the form already adapted for cervical cancer,  applied in a study in the state of Rio de Janeiro, composed of 29 questions  divided into four ranges: susceptibility (5 questions), severity (7 questions),  benefits (5 questions) and barriers (12 questions). For each statement of the  scales, the individual chooses between five alternatives: strongly disagree,  disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree and strongly agree. For each of the  alternatives is assigned a value ranging from one to five. The items are then  added and is obtained a value for each of the scales.<sup>8</sup></p>     <p>In the scales "susceptibility and severity" the  higher the score, the higher the perceived risk and severity to the CC. In the  scale "benefits", the higher the score, the individual believes in  the benefit of the Pap smear test. In the scale "barriers", the  higher the score, the greater the perceived barriers regarding the prevention  of cervical cancer.<sup>4</sup> The data were entered into spreadsheet of Excel  software, version 7.0 and transported to database creation and further analysis  by Statistica software, version 7.0.</p>     <p>To comparison  between the categorical variables, was performed a Multiple Correspondence  Analysis (MCA), in which the association between the variables is shown by the  distance between them in two-dimensional graphic or perceptual map, constructed  from a defining matrix of Association dimensions, of which are removed the dimensions  with greater explanatory power, in these are found the associations of greater  intensity. The MCA has as basis the beginning of the analyses process the x <i><sup>2</sup></i>Test.<sup>9</sup></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>According to  the same author, MCA is of great use, as becomes quite simple visualization of  all possible correlations between variables, so, known as multiple or  multivariate, helping in the understanding of several factors involved in the  same event.<sup>9</sup></p>     <p>For HBM  analysis, were used the values obtained with the sum of the numbers assigned  the answers provided by the participants of the study. The higher the value  obtained for each item, the greater the belief in replied item, so, the  relationship between such beliefs and attitudes presented and reported by  participants. For this classification, were used the scale showed in (<a href="#t1">Table 1</a>).</p>     <p align="center"><a name="t1"></a><a href="/img/revistas/iee/v34n1/en_v34n1a07t01.jpg" target="_blank">Table 1</a>.</p>     <p >This project was submitted to the Committee of Ethics  on Health of the Health Center of the UNIR, obtained approval, and the CAAE  number: 09269312.0.0000.5300. Were followed the recommendations of the  resolution/CNS/466/12.<sup>10</sup> Women's participation was voluntary with  the signing of the informed consent. Similarly, were obtained the prior  authorization of the health manager of city of Porto Velho.</p>     <p>&nbsp; </p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>RESULTS</b> </font></p>     <p>The 286 women are distributed in the age groups 20-59  years old, with a slight predominance of the age group 30-39 years. Regarding  family income, 69.9% live with up to three minimum wages, 23.8% have income  between four and nine minimum wages, 2.3% have income higher than 10 minimum  wages and 3.9% said live without own salary. When asked if they attended  school, 87.2% said yes. In addition, 18.4% have less than nine years of education,  64.8% have between nine and 12 years of education and 16.8% had more than 12  years of formal education.</p>     <p>Regarding the earlier realization of the Pap smear test,  87.7% of women said had done some time in their lives; while 11.1% said never did  it before. It also inquired about the number of cervical cytopathology test  made in the last twelve months and it was found that: 47.9% performed it once;  13.2% twice; 0.7% three times; and that 33.9% did not perform any test. As the  frequency with which carry out preventive examinations of the CC, highlight the  following frequencies: 53.0% annually; 17.6% every six months; 8.8% 1 once  every two years; 8.0% only once in a lifetime; 6.8% variable. The use of  condoms during intercourse was reported by only 17.8% of the interviewed women.</p>     <p>Also, was asked to the women if there was any case of cervical  or breast cancer in the family and 15.0% said yes. In addition, highlight the  frequency according to the relationship, 3.7% of cases occurred with the  mother; 37.0% with aunt; 11.1% with Grandma; 25.9% with cousin; 22.3% with  sister.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the HBM parameters, it was carried out the  sum of the values attributed to the answers given by the interviewed women.  Thus, it obtained an individual score for each of the four parameters. The  scores were grouped according to the scale already shown in the methodology.  First, as the demonstrative scores of perception of susceptibility, it was  found that 74.4% of women received low scores, highlighting the sense of low  risk or no risk of contracting cervical cancer among these women. Only 25.5%  had a mean perception of susceptibility and no woman reached the scores for high  perception of susceptibility.</p>     <p>Regarding the score of perception of severity, 74.4%  of women had an average perception of severity; 15.0% had low perception of severity;  and only 10.4% hit representative score of high perception of severity. As for  the perception of benefits with the exam for the prevention of CC, it is found  that 52.8% have average perception of the benefits gained from the examination,  43.7% have high perception of the benefits of the examination and 3.5%, low  perception of benefits with the completion of the test.</p>     <p>Regarding the perception of barriers to do the exam, were  found the following results: 51.4% have moderate perception of barriers; 47.9%  low; and only 0.7% high perception of the existence of barriers to prevent the  CC through periodic Pap smear test. To verify the possible association between  the variables of the HBM, socioeconomic characteristics and risk factors was  performed a Statistical analysis with multiple correspondences. (<a href="#t2">Table 2</a>) shows  the dimensions in which happened higher association, also bringing the selfvalues,  the individual percentage and the accumulated percentage of variability  explained by each dimension.</p>     <p align="center"><a name="t2"></a><a href="/img/revistas/iee/v34n1/en_v34n1a07t02.jpg" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. </p>     <p>The results,  presented in (<a href="#f1">Figure 1</a>), show association between low perception of  susceptibility, moderate perception of severity, moderate perception of  benefits, low and moderate perception of barriers with no income or income of  up to three minimum wages, less education than nine or nine to twelve years,  not using condoms during sex and may have done or not preventive test of CC  before. Also, it was found an association between moderate perception of  susceptibility, low and high perception of severity, high perception of  benefits with more than 12 years of study, income from four to nine or more  than 10 minimum wages and the use of condoms during sexual intercourse.</p>     <p>The variables high perception of barriers and low  perception of benefits, both in relation to the prevention of cervical cancer test  showed sparse responses distributed in diluted form, so it does not have  associations with the others variables. Among possible factors that would lead  to difficulties in the examination, 29.4% of the interviewed women said that  there is need for long wait. To fill many forms was pointed out for 19.5% as  factor which make harder to do the test. 20.0% of these women said they felt or  believe they may feel pain during the exam. Finally, 41.7% reported feelings of  shame with the professional while him perform the test.</p>     <p align="center"><a name="f1"></a><a href="/img/revistas/iee/v34n1/en_v34n1a07f01.jpg" target="_blank">Figure 1</a>.</p>     <p><b>Annotations:</b> S1, S2: respectively low  and moderate susceptibility; G1, G2, G3: respectively low, moderate, high  severity; Bn1, Bn2, Bn3: respectively low, moderate and high perception of  benefit; Br1, Br2, Br3: respectively low, moderate and high barrier; R1, R2,  R3, R4: relative to income, respectively, with no salary, up to three minimum  wages, between four and nine minimum wages, 10 or more minimum wages; C1, C2: anterior  performing of cervical cytology, respectively, yes and no; P1, P2: use of  condoms during sexual intercourse, respectively, yes and no; E1, E2, E3: related  for the years of study, respectively, less than nine years, between nine and 12  years and over 12 years. </p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>DISCUSSION</b> </font></p>     <p>Most women in this sample relate family income below  three minimum salaries. As for the years of study, the most significant portion  does not have higher education. Rafael and Correa found results like these in  their study, when they evaluated the profile of women assisted by public health  services.<sup>11,12</sup> Only 17.83% of the interviewed women said they use  condoms during sexual intercourse, a fact that drew great attention, since it  is one of the few methods to prevent HPV infection, said to be primarily  responsible for the development of cervical cancer. The largest association of  condom use with higher income and education index in the sample studied was not  surprising because other studies have highlighted the increased use of condoms  in these conditions.<sup>13</sup></p>     <p >The frequency of the test performance revealed a positive  result, showing that at least 80.7% of women performed the test at intervals  ranging from six months to three years, noting that the Ministry of Health  recommends that after two consecutive tests, in the interval of one year and  normal results, the frequency of the test be of three years.<sup>1</sup></p>     <p>As for the aspects evaluated by the Health Belief  Model, it is desirable that the scores of perception of susceptibility,  severity and benefits are high, as the score for the perception of barriers  should be low.<sup>14</sup> However, it was found that the perception of  susceptibility among interviewed women was low for the vast majority, and the  severity, moderate for the majority, and perception of benefits and barriers moderate  to more than 50% of the population, but, with a significant percentage of the  desirable scores. This was observed similarly by Rafael in his study in Rio de  Janeiro, due to the low sense of susceptibility associated with a higher  awareness of the benefits of the prevention test.<sup>8</sup> According to  these results and based on the precepts HBM can be stated that among the  interviewed women did not identify the desirable trend to preventive behaviors,  especially when were associate these results to the low use of condoms during  sexual intercourse.</p>     <p>Another factor that may be related to the data found  in this study is that only 15% of these women had cases of breast or cervical  cancer in the family, which may be contributing to the unwanted level of  perception of susceptibility. It was also verified by the use of condoms during  sexual intercourse teaming up more strongly to the group with the highest perception  susceptibility, severity, benefits with the test, lower perception of barriers  and higher education levels and family income as already was told. It is  showing with this, the importance of the human and population development not  only for prevention of cervical cancer, but also to sexually transmitted  diseases.</p>     <p>When multiple correspondence between HBM parameters  and other variables (Figure 1) was performed, was found that women with low  perception of susceptibility were associated with scores closer of the desirable  regarding severity, benefits and barriers. This may lead one to believe that  the low perception of susceptibility is associated with the fact that some  women, perform or have performed at least once in a lifetime the test to prevention  of CC.</p>     <p>Furthermore, the results regarding the association  between the variables shows that women with higher perception of susceptibility,  severity of the disease and high perception of benefits with the performance of  the test, have more formal education, higher income and increased use of  condoms during sexual intercourse.</p>     <p>Nevertheless, it is highlighted the proximity of the  women who had did cytology with the first group of this graph. This may be due  to the fact that the vast majority of studied women is found in other variables  groups, low income and low education, which pulls the topic previous cytology for  the large group in which they belong.</p>     <p>A study conducted in the state of Pernambuco,  regarding the coverage of the Pap smear test, showed that the examination was  more frequent among women with higher income and education, thus showing  similarity with this study as the appreciation of the test.<sup>15</sup> The largest  association between the test and higher income and educational level was also  observed by other authors.<sup>16-18</sup> The analysis of multiple or  multivariate correspondence proved to be of great value in achieving the  objectives of this study, because it allows the analysis of association between  different categorical variables, this method is often used in other studies.<sup>9,19</sup></p>     <p>Regarding to  the answers that show possible barriers to the cytology test of the cervix, were  found that a study realized in Piau&iacute; in 2007, through qualitative method, had  already found from the women's discourse the importance of feelings of fear,  shame and pain as impediments to the realization of the test.<sup>20</sup> Similarly, research in the state of Cear&aacute;, also found that shame is the feeling  perceived more strongly among women, also found that the nervousness and fear were  present among women before, during and after the test.<sup>21</sup> Other  studies, through quantitative method, also found high percentages of responses that  presented as barriers to the test the fear of it and the shame of examiner.<sup>8,18</sup></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>With the conclusion  of this study, it appears that individual aspects, such as women's knowledge  about the disease and its prevention, previous experience with the test and  knowledge of the body, are crucial in any decision making process involving the  carrying out the screening. Factors involving health services, as well as continuity  of care, relationship between professionals and women, reducing bureaucracy and  increasing the agility of the process can also reduce the barriers identified  by women. It is believed that the Family Health Strategy is able to improve the  framework of cervical cancer in Brazil. However, it is recognized the  limitation of this study and is recommended the conduction of researches using  different methodologies, with a view to understanding particular aspects  involved in the prevention or absence of cervical cancer.</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font size="3" face="Verdana"><b>REFERENCES</b> </font></p>     <!-- ref --><p>1.	Brasil. Minist&eacute;rio da Sa&uacute;de. Controle dos c&acirc;nceres de colo do &uacute;tero e mama Bras&iacute;lia, DF: Minist&eacute;rio da Sa&uacute;de; 2013. Caderno de aten&ccedil;&atilde;o b&aacute;sica n&ordm; 13.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057858&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref -->  </p>     <!-- ref --><p>2.	Brasil. Minist&eacute;rio da Sa&uacute;de. Nomenclatura brasileira para laudos cervicais e condutas preconizadas: recomenda&ccedil;&otilde;es para profissionais de sa&uacute;de. Bras&iacute;lia: Rio de Janeiro: INCA. 2006.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057860&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700002&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>3.	Franco EL, Franco-Duarte E, Ferenczy A. Cervical cancer: epidemiology, prevention and the role of human papillomavirus infection. Can Med Assoc J. 2001; 164(2):1017-25.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057862&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700003&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<!-- ref --><p>4.	Santos E.  Modelo de Cren&ccedil;as em Sa&uacute;de em familiares de pacientes com c&acirc;ncer colorretal. &#91;Dissertation&#93;. S&atilde;o Paulo: Funda&ccedil;&atilde;o Ant&ocirc;nio Prudente; 2008.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057864&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700004&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>5.	Fugita RM, Gualda DM. A causalidade do c&acirc;ncer de mama &agrave; luz do Modelo de Cren&ccedil;as em Sa&uacute;de. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2006; 40(4):501- 6.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057866&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700005&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>6.	Rosenstock IM. The health belief model and preventive health behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974; 2(4): 354-87.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057868&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700006&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>7.	Janz NK, Champion VL, Strecher VJ. The health belief model. In: Glanz K,  Rimer BK,  Lewis FM.  (Eds.).  Health  behavior  and  health  education:  theory,  research,  and  practice.  San  Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002: 45-66.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057870&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700007&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>8.	Rafael RMR. Barreiras na preven&ccedil;&atilde;o do c&acirc;ncer de colo uterino: Uma an&aacute;lise mediada pelo modelo de cren&ccedil;as em sa&uacute;de e sob a perspectiva da estrat&eacute;gia de sa&uacute;de da fam&iacute;lia. &#91;Disserta&ccedil;&atilde;o&#93;. Rio de Janeiro: Universidade Est&aacute;cio de S&aacute;; 2009.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057872&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700008&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<!-- ref --><p>9.	Hair FJ, Black WC, Babin B, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. An&aacute;lise Multivariada de Dados. 6th. Ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman; 2009, P. 21-36.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057874&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700009&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>10.	Brasil. Minist&eacute;rio da Sa&uacute;de. Conselho Nacional de Sa&uacute;de. Resolu&ccedil;&atilde;o n.466 de 12 de dezembro de 2012. Di&aacute;rio Oficial da Uni&atilde;o, Bras&iacute;lia, (12 Dec 2012).    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057876&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700010&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>11.	Rafael RMR, Moura ATMS. Barreiras na realiza&ccedil;&atilde;o da colpocitologia onc&oacute;tica: um inqu&eacute;rito domiciliar na &aacute;rea de abrang&ecirc;ncia da sa&uacute;de da fam&iacute;lia de Nova Igua&ccedil;u, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Cad Sa&uacute;de P&uacute;blica. 2010; 26(5):1045-50.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057878&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700011&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>12.	Corr&ecirc;a DAD. Perfil das usu&aacute;rias do sistema &uacute;nico de sa&uacute;de que realizam o Papanicolaou em Manaus, Amazonas. &#91;Dissertation&#93;. S&atilde;o Paulo: Universidade de Franca. Franca; 2009.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057880&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700012&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>13.	Carreno I, Costa JS. Uso de preservativo nas rela&ccedil;&otilde;es sexuais: estudo de base populacional. Rev Sa&uacute;de P&uacute;blica. 2006; 40(4):720-26.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057882&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700013&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<!-- ref --><p>14.	Rosenstock IM. Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Educ Monogr. 1974; 2(4):328-35.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057884&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700014&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>15.	Albuquerque KM, Frias PG, Andrade CL, Aquino EM, Menezes G, Szwarcwald, CL. Cobertura do teste de Papanicolaou e fatores associados &agrave; n&atilde;o realiza&ccedil;&atilde;o: um olhar sobre o programa de preven&ccedil;&atilde;o do c&acirc;ncer do colo do &uacute;tero em Pernambuco, Brasil. Cad Sa&uacute;de P&uacute;blica. 2009; 25(2);301-9.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057886&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700015&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>16.	Jorge RJ, Sampaio LR, Di&oacute;genes MA, Mendon&ccedil;a FA, Sampaio LL. Fatores associados a n&atilde;o realiza&ccedil;&atilde;o peri&oacute;dica do exame de Papanicolaou. Rev Rene. 2011; 12(3):606-12.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057888&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700016&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>17.	Amorim VM, Barros MB, C&eacute;sar CL, Carandina L, Goldbaum M. Fatores associados a n&atilde;o realiza&ccedil;&atilde;o do exame de Papanicolaou: um estudo de base populacional no Munic&iacute;pio de Campinas, S&atilde;o Paulo, Brasil. Cad Sa&uacute;de P&uacute;blica. 2006; 22(11): 2329-38.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057890&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700017&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>18.	Martins LF, Thuler LC, Valente JG. Cobertura do exame de Papanicolaou no Brasil e seus fatores determinantes: uma revis&atilde;o sistem&aacute;tica da literatura. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstetrica. 2005; 27(8):485-92.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057892&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700018&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<!-- ref --><p>19.	Alves LB, Belderrain MCN, Scarpel RA. Tratamento multivariado de dados por an&aacute;lise de correspond&ecirc;ncia e an&aacute;lise de agrupamentos. Anais do 13&ordm; encontro de inicia&ccedil;&atilde;o cient&iacute;fica e p&oacute;s-gradua&ccedil;&atilde;o do ITA - XIII ENCITA. S&atilde;o Jos&eacute; dos Campos - SP: 2007.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057894&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700019&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>20.	Brito CMS, Nery IS, Torres LC. Sentimentos e expectativas das mulheres acerca da citologia onc&oacute;tica. Rev Bras Enferm. 2007; 60(4):387-80.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057896&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700020&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p>     <!-- ref --><p>21.	Duavy LM, Batista FLR, Jorge MSB, Santos JBF. A percep&ccedil;&atilde;o da mulher sobre o exame preventivo do c&acirc;ncer c&eacute;rvico-uterino: estudo de caso. Ci&ecirc;nc Sa&uacute;de Coletiva. 2006;12(3):733-42.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=2057898&pid=S0120-5307201600010000700021&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --> </p> </font>     <p>&nbsp;</p>      ]]></body><back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<label>1</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>Brasil. Ministério da Saúde</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Controle dos cânceres de colo do útero e mama Brasília]]></source>
<year></year>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Ministério da Saúde]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<label>2</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>Brasil. Ministério da Saúde</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Nomenclatura brasileira para laudos cervicais e condutas preconizadas: recomendações para profissionais de saúde]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Brasília ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[INCA]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<label>3</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Franco]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[EL]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Franco-Duarte]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ferenczy]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Cervical cancer: epidemiology, prevention and the role of human papillomavirus infection]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Can Med Assoc J]]></source>
<year>2001</year>
<volume>164</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>1017-25</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<label>4</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Santos]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Modelo de Crenças em Saúde em familiares de pacientes com câncer colorretal]]></source>
<year>2008</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[São Paulo ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Fundação Antônio Prudente]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<label>5</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Fugita]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RM]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gualda]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[DM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[A causalidade do câncer de mama à luz do Modelo de Crenças em Saúde]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Rev Esc Enferm USP]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>40</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>501- 6</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<label>6</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Rosenstock]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[IM.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[The health belief model and preventive health behavior]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Health Educ Monogr]]></source>
<year>1974</year>
<volume>2</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>354-87</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<label>7</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Janz]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[NK]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Champion]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[VL]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Strecher]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[VJ]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The health belief model]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Glanz]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Rimer]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[BK]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Lewis]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[FM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<page-range>45-66</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[San Francisco ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Jossey-Bass]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<label>8</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Rafael]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RMR]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Barreiras na prevenção do câncer de colo uterino: Uma análise mediada pelo modelo de crenças em saúde e sob a perspectiva da estratégia de saúde da família]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Rio de Janeiro ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Universidade Estácio de Sá]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<label>9</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hair]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[FJ]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Black]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[WC]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Babin]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Anderson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RE]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Tatham]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RL]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Análise Multivariada de Dados]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<page-range>21-36</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[Porto Alegre ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Bookman]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<label>10</label><nlm-citation citation-type="">
<collab>Brasil. Ministério da Saúde</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Conselho Nacional de Saúde. Resolução n.466 de 12 de dezembro de 2012]]></source>
<year></year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Brasília ]]></publisher-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<label>11</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Rafael]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RMR]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Moura]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[ATMS.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Barreiras na realização da colpocitologia oncótica: um inquérito domiciliar na área de abrangência da saúde da família de Nova Iguaçu, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Cad Saúde Pública]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>26</volume>
<numero>5</numero>
<issue>5</issue>
<page-range>1045-50</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<label>12</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Corrêa]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[DAD]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Perfil das usuárias do sistema único de saúde que realizam o Papanicolaou em Manaus, Amazonas]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[São Paulo ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Universidade de Franca]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<label>13</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Carreno]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Costa]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[JS.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Uso de preservativo nas relações sexuais: estudo de base populacional]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Rev Saúde Pública]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>40</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>720-26</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<label>14</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Rosenstock]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[IM.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Historical origins of the health belief model]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Health Educ Monogr]]></source>
<year>1974</year>
<volume>2</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>328-35</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<label>15</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Albuquerque]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[KM]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Frias]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[PG]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Andrade]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[CL]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Aquino]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[EM]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Menezes]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Szwarcwald]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[CL]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Cobertura do teste de Papanicolaou e fatores associados à não realização: um olhar sobre o programa de prevenção do câncer do colo do útero em Pernambuco, Brasil]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Cad Saúde Pública]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>25</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>301-9</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<label>16</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jorge]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RJ]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sampaio]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LR]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Diógenes]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[MA]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Mendonça]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[FA]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sampaio]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LL.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Fatores associados a não realização periódica do exame de Papanicolaou]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Rev Rene]]></source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>12</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>606-12</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<label>17</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Amorim]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[VM]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Barros]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[MB]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[César]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[CL]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Carandina]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Goldbaum]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Fatores associados a não realização do exame de Papanicolaou: um estudo de base populacional no Município de Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Cad Saúde Pública]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>22</volume>
<numero>11</numero>
<issue>11</issue>
<page-range>2329-38</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<label>18</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Martins]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LF]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Thuler]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LC]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Valente]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[JG.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Cobertura do exame de Papanicolaou no Brasil e seus fatores determinantes: uma revisão sistemática da literatura]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Rev Bras Ginecol Obstetrica]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>27</volume>
<numero>8</numero>
<issue>8</issue>
<page-range>485-92</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<label>19</label><nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Alves]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LB]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Belderrain]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[MCN]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Scarpel]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RA]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Tratamento multivariado de dados por análise de correspondência e análise de agrupamentos]]></source>
<year>2007</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[São José dos Campos^eSP SP]]></publisher-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<label>20</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Brito]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[CMS]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Nery]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[IS]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Torres]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LC.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[Sentimentos e expectativas das mulheres acerca da citologia oncótica]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Rev Bras Enferm]]></source>
<year>2007</year>
<volume>60</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>387-80</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<label>21</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Duavy]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LM]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Batista]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[FLR]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jorge]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[MSB]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Santos]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[JBF.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[A percepção da mulher sobre o exame preventivo do câncer cérvico-uterino: estudo de caso]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Ciênc Saúde Coletiva]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>12</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>733-42</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
