Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24646201›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2014

Rationale and design of the iPap trial: a randomized controlled trial of home-based HPV self-sampling for improving participation in cervical screening by never- and under-screened women in Australia.

Farhana Sultana, Dallas R English, Julie A Simpson, Julia M L Brotherton, Kelly Drennan, Robyn Mullins, Stella Heley, C David Wrede, Marion Saville, Dorota M Gertig

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Farhana Sultana
Dallas R English
Julie A Simpson
Julia M L Brotherton
Kelly Drennan
Robyn Mullins
Stella Heley
C David Wrede
Marion Saville
Dorota M GertigCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. dgertig@vcs.org.au.
Myer Foundation · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AUCancer Council Victoria · AURoyal Women's Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOrganized screening based on Pap tests has substantially reduced deaths from cervical cancer in many countries, including Australia. However, the impact of the program depends upon the degree to which women participate. A new method of screening, testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA to detect the virus that causes cervical cancer, has recently become available. Because women can collect their own samples for this test at home, it has the potential to overcome some of the barriers to Pap tests. The iPap trial will evaluate whether mailing an HPV self-sampling kit increases participation by never- and under-screened women within a cervical screening program. METHODS/

designThe iPap trial is a parallel randomized controlled, open label, trial. Participants will be Victorian women age 30-69 years, for whom there is either no record on the Victorian Cervical Cytology Registry (VCCR) of a Pap test (never-screened) or the last recorded Pap test was between five to fifteen years ago (under-screened). Enrolment information from the Victorian Electoral Commission will be linked to the VCCR to determine the never-screened women. Variables that will be used for record linkage include full name, address and date of birth. Never- and under-screened women will be randomly allocated to either receive an invitation letter with an HPV self-sampling kit or a reminder letter to attend for a Pap test, which is standard practice for women overdue for a test in Victoria. All resources have been focus group tested. The primary outcome will be the proportion of women who participate, by returning an HPV self-sampling kit for women in the self-sampling arm, and notification of a Pap test result to the Registry for women in the Pap test arm at 3 and 6 months after mailout. The most important secondary outcome is the proportion of test-positive women who undergo further investigations at 6 and 12 months after mailout of results. DISCUSSION: The iPap trial will provide strong evidence about whether HPV self-sampling could be used in Australia to improve participation in cervical screening for never-and under-screened women.

trial registrationANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12613001104741; UTN: U1111-1148-3885.

Indexed as

AdultAustraliaCervix UteriDiagnostic Self EvaluationFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaeSelf CareSpecimen HandlingUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVaginal Smears

Identifiers

PMID24646201
PMCPMC3994873
OpenAlexW2009387166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.