ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2009
Incidence of cervical cancer after several negative smear results by age 50: prospective observational study.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Recommendations on screening for cervical cancer.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2013Guideline
- Indicators to identify cancer screening providers with suboptimal case detection: A scoping review.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Assessing high-risk human papillomavirus-based cervical precancer screening recommendations and implications among women aged 60/65 years and older in Ghana.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Lightweight Low-Rank Adaptation Vision Transformer Framework for Cervical Cancer Detection and Cervix Type Classification.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluation of PCR-Reverse Dot Blot Human Papillomavirus Genotyping Test in Predicting Residual/Recurrent CIN 2+ in Posttreatment Patients in China.Cancer management and research · 2020Article
- Effectiveness of cervical cancer screening at age 65 - A register-based cohort study.PloS one · 2019Article
- Article
- Cervical cancer screening in older women: new evidence and knowledge gaps.PLoS medicine · 2014Article
- Cervical screening at age 50-64 years and the risk of cervical cancer at age 65 years and older: population-based case control study.PLoS medicine · 2014Article
- Point: cervical cancer screening guidelines should consider observational data on screening efficacy in older women.American journal of epidemiology · 2013Article
- Contributions of recent and past sexual partnerships on incident human papillomavirus detection: acquisition and reactivation in older women.Cancer research · 2012Article
- Risk of cervical cancer after completed post-treatment follow-up of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: population based cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2012Article
- HPV Reflex Testing in Menopausal Women.Pathology research international · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the incidence of cervical cancer after several negative cervical smear tests at different ages.
designProspective observational study of incidence of cervical cancer after the third consecutive negative result based on individual level data in a national registry of histopathology and cytopathology (PALGA).
settingNetherlands, national data. Population 218,847 women aged 45-54 and 445,382 aged 30-44 at the time of the third negative smear test.
main outcome measures10 year cumulative incidence of interval cervical cancer.
results105 women developed cervical cancer within 2 595,964 woman years at risk after the third negative result at age 30-44 and 42 within 1,278,532 woman years at risk after age 45-54. During follow-up, both age groups had similar levels of screening. After 10 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence rate of cervical cancer was similar: 41/100,000 (95% confidence interval 33 to 51) in the younger group and 36/100,000 (24 to 52) in the older group (P=0.48). The cumulative incidence rate of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade I+ was twice as high in the younger than in the older group (P<0.001).
conclusionsThe risk for cervical cancer after several negative smear results by age 50 is similar to the risk at younger ages. Even after several negative smear results, age is not a good discriminative factor for early cessation of cervical cancer screening.
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.