SynthesisSystematic reviews2013
Screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 207 papers, 12 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.
Development of a Two-stage Cervical Cancer Screening Algorithm for Botswana
A Look at the Patterns in Medical Research Participation Among Patients With Cervical Cancer
Who cites it
207 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cancer screening uptake among refugees in high and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Preventive medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Cervical cancer screening practice and associated factors among female health care professionals in Ethiopia 2024: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Comparing the Diagnostic Performance of Quantitative PCR, Digital Droplet PCR, and Next-Generation Sequencing Liquid Biopsies for Human Papillomavirus-Associated Cancers.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2024Pooled it
- Digital health interventions for cervical cancer care: A systematic review and future research opportunities.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cervical cancer: A systematic review of the impact of COVID-19 on patient care.Preventive medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Attributes Used for Cancer Screening Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.The patient · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid (VIA) Screening on Cervical Cancer Mortality and Incidence - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative accuracy of cervical cancer screening strategies in healthy asymptomatic women: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Exposure Definition in Case-Control Studies of Cervical Cancer Screening: A Systematic Literature Review.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Social Media and mHealth Technology for Cancer Screening: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening in adults with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Diabetologia · 2020Pooled it
- Socioeconomic determinants of cancer screening utilisation in Latin America: A systematic review.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Knowledge about cervical cancer in young Portuguese women: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Trial
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of primary human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: Results from the HPV FOCAL Trial.Cancer medicine · 2021Trial
- How does information on the harms and benefits of cervical cancer screening alter the intention to be screened?: a randomized survey of Norwegian women.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2019Trial
- Effects of numerical information on intention to participate in cervical screening among women offered HPV vaccination: a randomised study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2016Trial
- Screening and diagnosis of liver disease in diabetes: a guide and evidence-based assessment.Diabetologia · 2026Review
- Effectiveness of community-based culturally tailored cervical cancer awareness interventions among women and decision-making men in low-resource settings: A pre-post design evaluation in rural Uganda and Bangladesh.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of Human Papillomavirus Screening Compared With Cytology Screening in Pregnant Women: Protocol for a Prospective Multicenter Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Perceived barriers and facilitators to conventional cervical screening: a qualitative study among women, primary health workers and community representatives in Uganda.BMC health services research · 2026Article
147 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe systematic review on which this paper is based provided evidence for the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care to update their guideline regarding screening for cervical cancer. In this article we highlight three questions covered in the full review that pertain to the effectiveness of screening for reducing cervical cancer mortality and incidence as well as optimal timing and frequency of screening.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central from 1995 to 2012 for relevant randomized controlled trials and observational studies with comparison groups. Eligible studies included women aged 15 to 70 years who were screened using conventional cytology, liquid-based cytology or human papillomavirus DNA tests. Relevance screening, data extraction, risk of bias analyses and quality assessments were performed in duplicate. We conducted a meta-analysis using a random-effects model on the one body of evidence that could be pooled.
resultsFrom the 15,145 screened citations, 27 papers (24 studies) were included; five older studies located in a United States Preventive Services Task Force review were also included. A randomized controlled trial in India showed even a single lifetime screening test significantly decreased the risk of mortality from and incidence of advanced cervical cancer compared to no screening (mortality: risk ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.47, 0.90; incidence: relative risk 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.42, 0.75). Cytology screening was shown to be beneficial in a cohort study that found testing significantly reduced the risk of being diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer compared to no screening (risk ratio 0.38; 95% confidence interval 0.23, 0.63). Pooled evidence from a dozen case-control studies also indicated a significant protective effect of cytology screening (odds ratio 0.35; 95% confidence interval 0.30, 0.41). This review found no conclusive evidence for establishing optimal ages to start and stop cervical screening, or to determine how often to screen; however the available data suggests substantial protective effects for screening women 30 years and older and for intervals of up to five years.
conclusionsThe available evidence supports the conclusion that cervical screening does offer protective benefits and is associated with a reduction in the incidence of invasive cervical cancer and 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.