ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental pathology2009
Cost-effectiveness of active versus conservative colposcopic management of mild dyskaryosis.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental pathology, 2009. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Management of mild dyskaryosis remains controversial. In this study, we compared the cost-effectiveness of active versus conservative colposcopic management of women presenting with mild dyskaryosis in two different hospital settings. All women presenting in 2001 with a mild dyskaryotic smear and requiring colposcopy were studied in two different clinical settings (70 women at Darent Valley Hospital (DVH) and 327 at St George's Hospital (SGH)). At DVH, treatment is offered should there be any evidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). On the other hand, a more conservative approach of cytological and colposcopical follow-up is offered to patients with evidence of low-grade disease at SGH. The outcome of both groups of patients was determined in terms of the number of colposcopy visits per patient, the risk of missing disease as a consequence of patients lost to follow-up and hospital costs as well as costs to patient over a four-year period. The majority (70%) of DVH patients had 1-2 colposcopy visits whereas the majority (60%) of SGH patients had 3-7 visits. At SGH 44% of untreated patients were lost to follow-up and an unknown number of those might have had high-grade disease. Active management is more cost-effective compared with conservative management ( pound323 and pound589 as cost per patient effectively treated in the two hospitals respectively). In conclusion, active management of low-grade disease is associated with lower hospital and patient costs compared with the conservative strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19079620PMC2600461What 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.