Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17872849›Full record

Trial reportCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2007

Papanicolaou smears: to swab or not to swab.

Narpinder Hans, Andrew J Cave, Olga Szafran, Gordon Johnson, Ann Glass, G Richard Spooner, Philip J Klemka, Shirley Schipper

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Trial report in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Narpinder HansMeadowbrook Medical Clinic, Edmonton.
Andrew J Cave
Olga Szafran
Gordon Johnson
Ann Glass
G Richard Spooner
Philip J Klemka
Shirley Schipper

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine whether cleaning the cervix with a cotton swab affects the quality of the conventional Papanicolaou smear.

designProspective, single-blinded randomized case-control study.

settingTwo academic family medicine teaching units and 1 community family practice site.

participantsFemale patients, 18 to 65 years of age, who presented for a routine Pap smear in the family practice setting were randomized into the Swab Group (n = 300) or the No Swab Group (n = 316).

interventionBefore the Pap smear, the cervix of patients in the Swab Group was wiped with a cotton swab until visibly free of mucus. In the No Swab Group, the cervix was not cleaned with a cotton swab before the Pap smear.

main outcome measuresThe quality of the conventional Pap smear was determined by the presence or absence of endocervical cells noted on the pathology report.

resultsThere was no major difference in the quality of the Pap smear in terms of the adequacy of endocervical cells between the Swab and No Swab Group.

conclusionCleaning the cervix with a cotton swab does not appear to affect the quality of the conventional Pap smear in terms of adequacy of endocervical cells. This implies that the practice of wiping or not wiping the mucus from the cervix before taking the Pap smear can be employed at the discretion of the clinician.

Indexed as

Cervix MucusPapanicolaou TestAdolescentAdultAgedCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesSingle-Blind MethodVaginal Smears

Identifiers

PMID17872849
PMCPMC1949259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.