Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23355601›Full record

ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2013

Cervical cancer screening among young adult women in the United States.

Katherine B Roland, Vicki B Benard, Ashwini Soman, Nancy Breen, Deanna Kepka, Mona Saraiya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

Katherine B RolandCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy, NE, MS K-55, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA. kroland@cdc.gov
Vicki B Benard
Ashwini Soman
Nancy Breen
Deanna Kepka
Mona Saraiya

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical cancer screening guidelines have evolved significantly in the last decade for young adult women, with current recommendations promoting later initiation and longer intervals.

methodsUsing self-reported cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 2000-2010 data, trends in Papanicolaou (Pap) testing among women ages 18-29 years were examined. NHIS 2010 data were used to investigate age at first Pap test (N = 2,198), time since most recent Pap test (n = 1,622), and predictors of Pap testing within the last 12 months (n = 1,622).

resultsThe percentage of 18-year-olds who reported ever having a Pap test significantly decreased from 49.9% in 2000 to 37.9% in 2010. Mean age at first Pap test in 2010 was significantly younger for non-Hispanic black women (16.9 years), women < high school education (16.9 years), women who received the HPV vaccine (17.1 years), and women who have ever given birth (17.3 years). The majority reported their last Pap test within the previous 12 months (73.1%). Usual source of healthcare (OR, 2.31) and current birth control use (OR, 1.64) significantly increased chances of having a Pap test within the previous 12 months.

conclusionsFrom 2000 to 2010, there was a gradual decline in Pap test initiation among 18-year-olds; however, in 2010, many women reported ≤12 months since last screening. Evidence-based guidelines should be promoted, as screening young adult women for cervical cancer more frequently than recommended can cause considerable harms. IMPACT: A baseline of cervical cancer screening among young adult women in the United States to assess adherence to evidence-based screening guidelines.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEthnicityFemaleHumansNeoplasm StagingPapanicolaou TestPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesPrognosisSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesPapillomavirus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID23355601
PMCPMC4480768

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.