Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24917238›Full record

ArticleJournal of immigrant and minority health2015

Participation and risk of high grade cytological lesions among immigrants and Italian-born women in an organized cervical cancer screening program in Central Italy.

Carmen Beatriz Visioli, Emanuele Crocetti, Marco Zappa, Anna Iossa, Karin Louise Andersson, Paolo Bulgaresi, Antonia Alfieri, Gianni Amunni

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of immigrant and minority health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Immigration, screening, and cervical cancer incidence: an application of Age-Period-Cohort analysis.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors.

Carmen Beatriz VisioliClinical and Descriptive Epidemiology Unit, ISPO - Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica, Via delle Oblate 2, 50144, Florence, Italy, latorre.visioli2@teletu.it.
Emanuele Crocetti
Marco Zappa
Anna Iossa
Karin Louise Andersson
Paolo Bulgaresi
Antonia Alfieri
Gianni Amunni

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Few studies analyzed the risk for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or worse (HSIL+) among immigrants and natives attending organized cervical cancer (CC) screening programs (SP). We evaluated participation and diagnosis of HSIL+ by country of birth with logistic models. Overall 540,779 invitation letters were delivered to target women of Florence SP in three screening rounds (years 2000-2002, 2003-2005, 2006-2008). The probability of attending screening was lower for immigrants than natives, but the difference decreased from 35% (1st round) to 20% (2nd-3rd round) for women born in high migration pressure (HMP) countries. The risk of HSIL+ was double than natives for HMP-born women from countries with high prevalence of human papillomavirus, even adjusting for age and previous history of Pap test. This is an important public health problem due to an increasing proportion over time of immigrant women with a lower attendance and greater risk for CC.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerAdultEmigrants and ImmigrantsFemaleHumansItalyMiddle AgedPapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

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.