Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24563518›Full record

Trial reportJournal of the National Cancer Institute2014

Effect of VIA screening by primary health workers: randomized controlled study in Mumbai, India.

Surendra S Shastri, Indraneel Mittra, Gauravi A Mishra, Subhadra Gupta, Rajesh Dikshit, Shalini Singh, Rajendra A Badwe

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 113 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
113citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
20.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

113 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 239 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Global Authorship Representation in Otolaryngology Clinical Trials.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Navigating cancer care in India: Reflections & imperatives.The Indian journal of medical research · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

53 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Surendra S ShastriAffiliations of authors: Tata Memorial Centre, Parel, Mumbai, India (SSS, IM, GAM, SG, RD, RAB); Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Limited, PharmaOps Horsham, West Sussex, UK (SS).
Indraneel Mittra
Gauravi A Mishra
Subhadra Gupta
Rajesh Dikshit
Shalini Singh
Rajendra A Badwe
Tata Memorial Hospital · IN

Funding

EARLY DETECTION OF COMMON CANCERS IN WOMEN IN INDIAR01CA074801 · NCI · TATA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL · PI SHASTRI, SURENDRANATH SRINIVAS · 1997 to 2014
$2.5M
NCI NIH HHS 5R01CA074801
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality among women in India. Because Pap smear screening is not feasible in India, we need to develop effective alternatives.

methodsA cluster-randomized controlled study was initiated in 1998 in Mumbai, India, to investigate the efficacy of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) performed by primary health workers in reducing cervical cancer mortality. Four rounds of cancer education and VIA screening were conducted at 24-month intervals in the screening group, whereas cancer education was offered once at entry to the control group. The study was planned for 16 years to include four screening rounds followed by four monitoring rounds. We present results after 12 years of follow-up. Poisson regression method was used to calculate the rate ratios (RRs); two-sided χ(2) was used to calculate the probability.

resultsWe recruited 75360 women from 10 clusters in the screening group and 76178 women from 10 comparable clusters in the control group. In the screening group, we achieved 89% participation for screening and 79.4% compliance for diagnosis confirmation. The incidence of invasive cervical cancer was 26.74 per 100000 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 23.41 to 30.74) in the screening group and 27.49 per 100000 (95% CI = 23.66 to 32.09) in the control group. Compliance to treatment for invasive cancer was 86.3% in the screening group and 72.3% in the control group. The screening group showed a statistically significant 31% reduction in cervical cancer mortality (RR = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.88; P = .003).

conclusionsVIA screening by primary health workers statistically significantly reduced cervical cancer mortality. Our study demonstrates the efficacy of an easily implementable strategy that could prevent 22000 cervical cancer deaths in India and 72600 deaths in resource-poor countries annually.

Indexed as

Acetic AcidHealth EducationIndicators and ReagentsAdultEarly Detection of CancerFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceIndiaMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingOdds RatioPatient ComplianceAcetic AcidIndicators and Reagents

Identifiers

PMID24563518
PMCPMC3982783
OpenAlexW2155931571

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.