ArticlePloS one2010
Effectiveness of VIA, Pap, and HPV DNA testing in a cervical cancer screening program in a peri-urban community in Andhra Pradesh, India.
Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02688816 (Z 1313 - Comparison of Point-of-care Molecular Tests and Visual Inspection With Acetic Acid for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-infected Women in Lusaka, Zambia), which is not on this map. Cited by 60 papers, 4 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.
Z 1313 - Comparison of Point-of-care Molecular Tests and Visual Inspection With Acetic Acid for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-infected Women in Lusaka, Zambia
Who cites it
60 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 137 citations in OpenAlex.
- The diagnostic accuracy of macrophage colony-stimulating factor for cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2022Pooled 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
- Implementing community-based cervical cancer screening programs using visual inspection with acetic acid in India: A systematic review.Cancer epidemiology · 2017Pooled it
- Article
- Cervical cancer burden in India: A descriptive epidemiological study and policy insights.Global epidemiology · 2025Article
- Unveiling the burden of human papillomavirus infection and risk factors among Indigenous women in Mizoram, Northeast India.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Cervical cancer screening data from the case-based national electronic registry in Bangladesh.BMC global and public health · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence vs. Oncologist Interpretation in Digital Cervicography for Abnormal Cervical Cytology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Electronic aggregated data collection on cervical cancer screening in Bangladesh since 2014: what the data tells us?BMC public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Cervical cancer screening and treatment for PLWHIV: experiences from an innovative program in Nigeria.Reproductive health · 2023Article
- AVIVA: a telehealth tool to improve cervical cancer screening in resource-constrained settings.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Cervical Cancer Screening on Images Taken during Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Co-creation of human papillomavirus self-sampling delivery strategies for cervical cancer screening in rural Zimbabwe: nominal group technique.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Application of the hub and spokes model in improving access to cervical cancer screening in Ghana.Ghana medical journal · 2022Article
- Cervical Lesion Classification Method Based on Cross-Validation Decision Fusion Method of Vision Transformer and DenseNet.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile many studies have compared the efficacy of Pap cytology, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) and human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA assays for the detection cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer, few have evaluated the program effectiveness. METHODS AND
findingsA population-based sample of 5603 women from Medchal Mandal in Andhra Pradesh, India were invited to participate in a study comparing Pap cytology, VIA, and HPV DNA screening for the detection of CIN3+. Participation in primary screening and all subsequent follow-up visits was rigorously tracked. A 20% random sample of all women screened, in addition to all women with a positive screening test result underwent colposcopy with directed biopsy for final diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were adjusted for verification bias. HPV testing had a higher sensitivity (100%) and specificity (90.6%) compared to Pap cytology (sensitivity = 78.2%; specificity = 86.0%) and VIA (sensitivity = 31.6%; specificity = 87.5%). Since 58% of the sample refused involvement and another 28% refused colposcopy or biopsy, we estimated that potentially 87.6% of the total underlying cases of CIN3 and cancer may have been missed due to program failures.
conclusionsWe conclude that despite our use of available resources, infrastructure, and guidelines for cervical cancer screening implementation in resource limited areas, community participation and non-compliance remain the major obstacles to successful reduction in cervical cancer mortality in this Indian population. HPV DNA testing was both more sensitive and specific than Pap cytology and VIA. The use of a less invasive and more user-friendly primary screening strategy (such as self-collected swabs for HPV DNA testing) may be required to achieve the coverage necessary for effective reduction in cervical cancer mortality.
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.