Gynecologic Cancer Awareness Linked to More Positive Screening Attitudes Among Turkish Women

A cross-sectional path analysis of 382 married women aged 30 to 64 in Türkiye has found that women who know more about gynecologic cancers also tend to hold more positive attitudes toward cancer screening. The study, published open access in BMC Public Health on 22 October 2026 by Kevser Işik, Hatice Gül Öztaş and Ezgi Dirgar, used structural equation modelling to test whether awareness of cancers affecting the female reproductive system is associated with how women view screening. The answer was yes, but with an important caveat: awareness explained only a modest share of the differences in screening attitudes, leaving most of the variation unaccounted for.

Participants completed a demographic information form, the Gynecologic Cancer Awareness Scale (GCAS) and the Cancer Screening Attitude Scale (CSA). The mean GCAS score was 143.69 with a standard deviation of 32.31, while the mean CSA score was 83.32 with a standard deviation of 15.39. An a priori power calculation with G*Power had indicated that a minimum of 172 participants would be needed; the final analytical sample of 382 women comfortably exceeded that threshold. Data were analysed in SPSS 25.0, with the structural model estimated in SmartPLS version 4.1.1.8.

The central hypothesis held up under bootstrapping. Gynecologic cancer awareness was positively and statistically significantly associated with attitudes toward cancer screening, with a standardized path coefficient of 0.390 (standard error 0.038, t = 10.283, p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval [0.315, 0.464]). In practical terms, women with higher awareness scores reported more favourable attitudes toward being screened. Because the design was descriptive and cross-sectional, the authors can report an association rather than a causal effect; the data cannot show whether raising awareness would change attitudes, or whether other characteristics drive both.

Among the exploratory paths tested in the model, educational status was positively associated with screening attitudes (β = 0.164, SE = 0.048, t = 3.412, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.068, 0.258]). The remaining exploratory structural paths were not statistically significant. Notably, the model explained 19.5% of the variance in cancer screening attitudes (R² = 0.195), while the explained variance in gynecologic cancer awareness was negligible (R² = 0.001). That asymmetry suggests the predictors included in the model say little about why some women know more about gynecologic cancers than others, even though awareness itself tracks with screening attitudes.

The authors interpret the limited R² as evidence that other individual, psychosocial and healthcare-related factors likely contribute to women’s attitudes toward screening, beyond awareness and education. The study population was restricted to married women aged 30 to 64 who met the inclusion criteria and agreed to participate, so the findings should not be generalized to unmarried women, women outside that age range, or populations in other countries without further research. As with any cross-sectional survey, the measures reflect self-reported awareness and attitudes at a single point in time.

For public health planners in Türkiye, the results offer a measured signal rather than a prescription. The statistically robust association between awareness and screening attitudes is consistent with the idea that educational interventions targeting gynecologic cancer knowledge could accompany screening promotion efforts, and the independent positive association of educational status reinforces that attitudes toward screening are shaped partly by socioeconomic background. At the same time, the fact that the model left roughly four-fifths of the variance in screening attitudes unexplained cautions against treating awareness campaigns as a sufficient strategy on their own. The study’s descriptive, cross-sectional design and its reliance on validated self-report scales mean the coefficients describe patterns in this sample rather than tested mechanisms, and the authors themselves flag the need to consider a broader set of determinants in future work.

Subject of Research: The association between women's awareness of gynecologic cancers and their attitudes toward cancer screening in Türkiye, examined using path analysis.

Article Title: The relationship between women’s awareness of gynecologic cancers and their attitudes toward cancer screening in Türkiye: a path analysis

Article References: Işik, K., Öztaş, H. G., & Di̇rgar, E. (2026). The relationship between women’s awareness of gynecologic cancers and their attitudes toward cancer screening in Türkiye: a path analysis. BMC Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-026-29864-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12889-026-29864-y

Keywords: gynecologic cancer, cancer screening, health awareness, path analysis, structural equation modelling, Türkiye, women's health, cross-sectional study, BMC Public Health, screening attitudes, relationship, between