Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25081485›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2014

Regional and national guideline recommendations for digital ano-rectal examination as a means for anal cancer screening in HIV positive men who have sex with men: a systematic review.

Jason J Ong, Marcus Chen, Andrew E Grulich, Christopher K Fairley

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Politics of LGBT+ Health Inequality: Conclusions from a UK Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Cancer screening in women living with HIV infection.Women's health (London, England) · 2017
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Anal cancer and intraepithelial neoplasia screening: A review.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2016
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jason J OngMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 580 Swanston Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia. j.ong@unimelb.edu.au.
Marcus Chen
Andrew E Grulich
Christopher K Fairley
The University of Melbourne · AUMelbourne Sexual Health Centre · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough anal cancer is common in HIV positive men who have sex with men, few centres offer systematic screening. Regular digital ano-rectal examination (DARE) is a type of screening that has been recommended by some experts. How widely this forms part of HIV management guidelines is unclear.

methodsThe protocol was registered prospectively (CRD42013005188; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/). We systematically reviewed 121 regional and national HIV guidelines and searched for guidelines from http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/global?page=cr-00-04#SauguidelineX, PubMed and Web of Science databases up to 5th August 2013 for recommendations of DARE as a means of anal cancer screening in HIV positive MSM. Guidelines were examined in detail if they were clinical guidelines, including both prevention and treatment protocols and were in English. Guidelines were excluded if they were restricted to limited areas (e.g. antiretroviral therapy only, children or pregnant women, strategies for prevention/testing). Information was extracted regarding recommendation of DARE as a screening method, the frequency of DARE recommended, target population for screening and the strength of evidence supporting this.

results30 regional and national guidelines were included and examined in detail. Only 2 recommended DARE. The 'European AIDS Clinical Society Guidelines' recommends DARE every 1-3 years for HIV positive MSM whilst the 'US Guideline for prevention and treatment of opportunistic infections in HIV-infected adults and adolescents' recommends an annual DARE for the HIV + population in general. None of these guidelines specify the age of commencing screening. In each case, the highest level of evidence supporting these two recommendations was expert opinion.

conclusionsFew HIV guidelines discuss or recommend DARE as a means of anal cancer screening. Studies of the efficacy, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of DARE are needed to assess its role in anal cancer screening.

Indexed as

Digital Rectal ExaminationEarly Detection of CancerAnus NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisEuropeHIV InfectionsHomosexuality, MaleHumansMalePractice Guidelines as TopicRetrospective StudiesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID25081485
PMCPMC4137084
OpenAlexW2086069847

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.