ArticlePLoS medicine2014
Cervical screening at age 50-64 years and the risk of cervical cancer at age 65 years and older: population-based case control study.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 2 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
63 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled 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
- 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
- The Use of First-Void Urine to Screen Women Aged 60-79 for HPV in the UK: The Catch-Up Screen Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Trial
- The impact of age-relevant and generic infographics on knowledge, attitudes and intention to attend cervical screening: A randomized controlled trial.British journal of health psychology · 2024Trial
- Value of a catch-up HPV test in women aged 65 and above: A Danish population-based nonrandomized intervention study.PLoS medicine · 2023Trial
- 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
- Predictive determinants of CIN II + lesions in women over 65 years old: the contribution of HPV, colposcopy, and double immunostaining techniques.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Role of endocervical curettage in detecting CIN2 + in postmenopausal women with persistent high-risk HPV and type 3 transformation zone.BMC cancer · 2025Observational
- Assessing high-risk human papillomavirus-based cervical precancer screening recommendations and implications among women aged 60/65 years and older in Ghana.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Estimated Cancer Risk in Females Who Meet the Criteria to Exit Cervical Cancer Screening.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- High Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (HSIL) Positive Disease Risk Nomogram Model: A Single Centre Retrospective Analysis.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Accessibility of Criteria to Exit Cervical Cancer Screening at Age 65 Years in the Electronic Health Record.O&G open · 2024Article
- Analysis of related factors for pathological upgrading of cervical biopsy from CIN3 to cancer after conical resection.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Diagnostic value of high-risk HPV E6/E7 mRNA in patients with ASCUS.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Effect of Test History at Ages 50-64 on Later Cervical Cancer Risk: A Population-based Case-control Study.Cancer research communications · 2023Article
- Epidemiology of cervical cancer in elderly women: Analysis of incidence, treatment, and survival using German registry data.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of Cervical Testing in and outside a Screening Program-A Case-Control Study.Cancers · 2022Article
- Cervical screening: the evolving landscape.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Understanding cervical cancer after the age of routine screening: Characteristics of cases, treatment, and survival in the United States.Gynecologic oncology · 2022Article
- Non-speculum sampling for cervical screening in older women.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is little consensus, and minimal evidence, regarding the age at which to stop cervical screening. We studied the association between screening at age 50-64 y and cervical cancer at age 65-83 y. METHODS AND
findingsCases were women (n = 1,341) diagnosed with cervical cancer at age 65-83 y between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2012 in England and Wales; age-matched controls (n = 2,646) were randomly selected from population registers. Screening details from 1988 onwards were extracted from national databases. We calculated the odds ratios (OR) for different screening histories and subsequent cervical cancer. Women with adequate negative screening at age 65 y (288 cases, 1,395 controls) were at lowest risk of cervical cancer (20-y risk: 8 cancers per 10,000 women) compared with those (532 cases, 429 controls) not screened at age 50-64 y (20-y risk: 49 cancers per 10,000 women, with OR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.13-0.19). ORs depended on the age mix of women because of the weakening association with time since last screen: OR = 0.11, 95% CI 0.08-0.14 at 2.5 to 7.5 y since last screen; OR = 0.27, 95% CI 0.20-0.36 at 12.5 to 17.5 y since last screen. Screening at least every 5.5 y between the ages 50 and 64 y was associated with a 75% lower risk of cervical cancer between the ages 65 and 79 y (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.21-0.30), and the attributable risk was such that in the absence of screening, cervical cancer rates in women aged 65+ would have been 2.4 (95% CI 2.1-2.7) times higher. In women aged 80-83 y the association was weaker (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.83) than in those aged 65-69 y (OR = 0.12, 95% CI 0.09-0.17). This study was limited by an absence of data on confounding factors; additionally, findings based on cytology may not generalise to human papillomavirus testing.
conclusionsWomen with adequate negative screening at age 50-64 y had one-sixth of the risk of cervical cancer at age 65-83 y compared with women who were not screened. Stopping screening between ages 60 and 69 y in women with adequate negative screening seems sensible, but further screening may be justifiable as life expectancy increases.
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.