ArticleCancer cytopathology2016
Why follow-back studies should be interpreted cautiously: The case of an HPV-negative cervical lesion.
Article in Cancer cytopathology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hepatocyte nuclear factor 4 alpha immunocytochemistry: A useful marker for detecting endocervical glandular lesions in alcohol-fixed smears.Cancer cytopathology · 2025Article
- Molecular Features of HPV-Independent Cervical Cancers.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- HPV-Negative Adenocarcinomas of the Uterine Cervix: From Molecular Characterization to Clinical Implications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Cervical Screening Performance.American journal of clinical pathology · 2021Article
- Human Papillomavirus-Negative Cervical Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Review
- Surgical staging identified false HPV-negative cases in a large series of invasive cervical cancers.Papillomavirus research (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2017Article
- HPV-based cervical cancer screening- facts, fiction, and misperceptions.Preventive medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26356132What 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.