ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2003
Cross sectional study of conventional cervical smear, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 181 citations in OpenAlex.
- Liquid-Based Cytology in Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Acta cytologica · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative accuracy of cervical cancer screening strategies in healthy asymptomatic women: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- The Korean guideline for cervical cancer screening.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2015Guideline
- The diagnostic value of serum hybrid capture 2 (CH2) HPV DNA in cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2014Pooled it
- Human papillomavirus testing versus repeat cytology for triage of minor cytological cervical lesions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Epidemiologic natural history and clinical management of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Disease: a critical and systematic review of the literature in the development of an HPV dynamic transmission model.BMC infectious diseases · 2009Pooled it
- Options for managing low grade cervical abnormalities detected at screening: cost effectiveness study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2009Trial
- The performance of human papillomavirus high-risk DNA testing in the screening and diagnostic settings.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2008Trial
- Accuracy of liquid based versus conventional cytology: overall results of new technologies for cervical cancer screening: randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2007Trial
- Current status and challenges in timely detection of cervical cancer in Mexico: expert consensus.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Female healthcare providers' knowledge, attitude, and practice towards cervical cancer screening and associated factors in public hospitals of Northwest Ethiopia.SAGE open medicine · 2022Article
- A pilot study of mobile digital colposcopy in Japanese patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasm.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2021Article
- Screening for cervical dysplasia and reproductive tract infections in Kerala, India: A multicentric study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2020Article
- Comparative analyses of PAP smear data in pre and postmenopause Indian women.Bioinformation · 2020Article
- Prevention of Cervical Cancer: Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3 Level, AWMF Register Number 015/027OL, December 2017) - Part 1 with Introduction, Screening and the Pathology of Cervical Dysplasia.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2019Article
- Assessment of the current state of knowledge and risk factors of cervical cancer among women in the Buea Health District, Cameroon.The Pan African medical journal · 2019Article
- Cervical cancer in the Bamenda Regional Hospital, North West Region of Cameroon: a retrospective study.The Pan African medical journal · 2019Article
- Application of deep learning to the classification of images from colposcopy.Oncology letters · 2018Article
- Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion triage in Korean women: Revisiting the 2012 American Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology screening guidelines.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver reliability of conventional cervical smear tests, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus testing for screening for cervical cancer.
designCross sectional study in which the three techniques were performed simultaneously with a reference standard (colposcopy and histology).
settingPublic university and private practices in France, with complete independence from the suppliers.
participants828 women referred for colposcopy because of previously detected cytological abnormalities and 1757 women attending for routine smears.
main outcome measuresClinical readings and optimised interpretation (two blind readings followed, if necessary, by consensus). Sensitivity, specificity, and weighted kappa computed for various thresholds of abnormalities.
resultsConventional cervical smear tests were more often satisfactory (91% v 87%) according to the Bethesda system, more reliable (weighted kappa 0.70 v 0.57), and had consistently better sensitivity and specificity than monolayer cytology. These findings applied to clinical readings and optimised interpretations, low and high grade lesions, and populations with low and high incidence of abnormalities. Human papillomavirus testing associated with monolayer cytology, whether systematic or for atypical cells of undetermined significance, performed no better than conventional smear tests.
conclusionsMonolayer cytology is less reliable and more likely to give false positive and false negative results than conventional cervical smear tests for screening for cervical cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.