ArticlePloS one2015
Acceptability and Accuracy of Cervical Cancer Screening Using a Self-Collected Tampon for HPV Messenger-RNA Testing among HIV-Infected Women in South Africa.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 5 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global research trends and hotspots in human immunodeficiency virus-associated cervical cancer (1990-2025): a multi-database bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
- Assessment of HPV screening modalities within primary care: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Prevention of cervical cancer in HIV-seropositive women from developing countries through cervical cancer screening: a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Implementation strategies to improve cervical cancer prevention in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2018Pooled it
- Point-of-care hrHPV mRNA detection with reverse transcription recombinase polymerase amplification on a portable fluorimeter from provider-collected cervical samples in Maputo, Mozambique.Infectious agents and cancer · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors Regarding HPV Vaccination and Self-Sampling Among US Young Adults.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Differential Uptake and Release of Female Genital Secretions Components and HPV DNA by Veil, Swab, and Vaginal Tampon.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Impact of educational intervention on the uptake of self-sampling for HPV test-based cervical cancer screening.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of the Daye diagnostic tampon compared to clinician-collected and self-collected vaginal swabs for detecting HPV: a comparative study.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Efficacy and acceptability of a self-collected medical grade tampon as a novel vaginal sample collection tool for the detection of HPV and STIs.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Experiences and Preferences Reported with an At-Home Self-Collection Device Compared with In-Clinic Speculum-Based Cervical Cancer Screening in the United States.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Acceptability of human papillomavirus self-sampling among women living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus genotypes in outpatient Malian women living with HIV: a pilot study.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Human papillomavirus self-sampling versus provider-sampling in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review of accuracy, acceptability, cost, uptake, and equity.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Menstrual Tampons Are Reliable and Acceptable Tools to Self-Collect Vaginal Microbiome Samples.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- A Comprehensive Review of Cervical Cancer Screening Devices: The Pros and the Cons.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2023Review
- Innovations in healthcare delivery: Human papilloma virus self sampling diagnostics and participatory innovations for CCS.Cancer medicine · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHIV increases women's risk for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) infection and invasive cervical cancer. South Africa has a high HIV prevalence but low cervical cancer screening coverage. Self-collection of cervical specimens and hrHPV testing, including hrHPV messenger-RNA (mRNA) testing, are methods aimed at increasing screening rates. However, data are limited on the acceptability and accuracy of tampon-based self-collection for hrHPV mRNA testing in HIV-infected women.
methodsWe recruited 325 HIV-infected women seeking care at a government HIV clinic in Pretoria, South Africa. A clinician performed a pelvic examination and obtained an endocervical specimen. Study participants performed self-collection using a tampon. Both clinician- and self-collected specimens were tested for hrHPV mRNA. Acceptability of both collection methods was assessed, the prevalence of hrHPV mRNA in our study population was estimated, test positivity of the two collection methods were compared, and test agreement was assessed by calculating the κ-statistic, sensitivity, and specificity.
resultsOver 90% of women reported no difficulties self-collecting specimens and 82% were willing to perform the tampon-collection at home. Based on clinician-collection specimens, the prevalence of hrHPV mRNA in our study population was 36.7% (95% CI: 31.4%- 42.0%). There was no difference in test positivity between clinician-collection, 36.7%, and tampon-collection, 43.5% (p-value = 0.08). Using clinician-collection as the reference test, the sensitivity and specificity for hrHPV mRNA of tampon-collection were 77.4% (95% CI: 69.8-85.0%) and 77.8% (95% CI: 71.9-83.6%), respectively.
conclusionsTampon-based self-collection is acceptable to women and has similar hrHPV mRNA positivity rates as clinician-collection, but has reduced sensitivity and specificity compared to clinician-collection. The hrHPV mRNA prevalence in our study population is high, but similar to other high-risk populations, and highlights the need for improved cervical cancer screening. Further research into the optimal use of tampon-based collection as a cervical cancer screening tool is warranted.
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.