Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2011
HPV self-sampling as an alternative strategy in non-attenders for cervical screening - a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 11 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
85 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 177 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness studies evaluating HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening - a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Screening for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer: systematic reviews to inform an update to recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among Latinas in the United States: A systematic review.Cancer medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Offering HPV self-sampling kits: an updated meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies to increase participation in cervical cancer screening.British journal of cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Does self-sampling for human papilloma virus testing have the potential to increase cervical cancer screening? An updated meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2019Pooled it
- Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Pooled it
- The acceptability of vaginal smear self-collection for screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2017Pooled it
- Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2013Pooled it
- Self-collected HPV testing improves participation in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2013Pooled it
- Effect of Self-Sampling HPV DNA Testing on Cervical Cancer Screening in Singapore's Primary Care: Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of family medicine · 2026Trial
- Streamlined Self-Collection Screening for Sexually Transmitted Infections and Human Papillomavirus: A Single-Group Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Effect of Patient Characteristics on Uptake of Screening Using a Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-sampling Kit: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2022Trial
- Implementation of a self-sampling HPV test for non-responders to cervical cancer screening in Japan: secondary analysis of the ACCESS trial.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Non-speculum sampling approaches for cervical screening in older women: randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Trial
- Assessing the impact of mailing self-sampling kits for human papillomavirus testing to unscreened non-responder women in Manitoba.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Trial
25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA randomised trial to ascertain whether women who do not attend for cervical screening are more likely to respond to the opportunity to collect a self-sample for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, or to a further invitation to attend for cervical screening.
methodsThe study was carried out in a Primary Care Trust (PCT) in London between June 2009 and December 2009. In total, 3000 women were randomly selected from persistent non-responders (i.e., who had not responded to at least two invitations to attend for screening). The women were randomised on a 1 : 1 basis to either receive an HPV self-sampling kit or a further invitation to attend for cervical cytology. The main outcome measures were (1) percentage of women attending for cervical cytology compared with those returning a self-sample HPV test or attending for cytology subsequent to receiving the kit and (2) percentage of those testing positive for HPV who attended further investigation.
resultsThe total response in the self-sampling group for screening was 10.2%. Of the 1500 women in the control group sent a further invitation for cervical screening, 4.5% attended for cytology screening. This difference is highly statistically significant (P<0.0001). Of the 8 women who tested positive for HPV, 7 attended for a cervical smear and had a concurrent colposcopy. Three of these (43%) had high-grade disease (defined as CIN 2+), with one found to have an invasive cancer (stage 1b) and one CIN 3.
conclusionsThe value of this intervention relies on the detection of high-grade CIN and early stage cancer with a good prognosis. The relatively high yield of abnormalities found is consistent with that expected among a hard to reach and relatively high-risk group of women. Our study suggests that self-sampling could increase participation among non-responders in England, but further work is needed to ascertain whether the low response rate seen here is likely to be representative of the rest of the country. Other studies are needed to investigate the response to self-sampling in different demographic and geographic settings.
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.