Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22684274›Full record

ArticleDer Pathologe2012

[Cervical cancer screening in Germany. Current status].

V Schneider

Abstract readComparative StudyEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Pathologe, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

1 author.

V SchneiderPathologisches Labor, Burgunderstr. 1, 79104, Freiburg, Deutschland. volk.schneider@t-online.de

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cervical cancer screening was introduced in Germany 40 years ago and the incidence of cancer of the cervix has subsequently decreased by close to 70%. The remaining incidence of 5,600 cases per year represents only 2.8% of all newly occurring cases of cancer in women and these cases occur mainly in patients who do not participate in regular screening. Thus, cervical cancer screening by cytological smears has been proven to be successful. The structure of the German cancer screening program is characterized by decentralized organization, exclusive involvement of medical specialists such as gynecologists and pathologists and strict quality assurance. The recruitment is 50% on a yearly basis and the cumulative participation over 3 years reaches 79%. Since 2008 all laboratories are required to report complete data sets to local quality control agencies.The Joint Federal Committee in charge of evaluating new technologies in Germany mandated an inquiry into the possible role of screening by human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. According to this report published by the Institute for Quality Assurance and Efficiency in Healthcare there are indications for advantages. There are, however, no data in the literature as to possible disadvantages of HPV testing. A similar study for the US Preventive Services Task Force was published in May 2011 with almost identical conclusions.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerAdultCervix UteriCross-Sectional StudiesEarly DiagnosisFemaleGermanyHumansIncidencePapillomavirus InfectionsPredictive Value of TestsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVaginal Smears

Identifiers

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.