ArticleIrish journal of medical science2016
High risk HPV testing following treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Tests for Postcolposcopy and Posttreatment Surveillance.Journal of lower genital tract disease · 2020Pooled it
- Reporting and Assessing the Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies for Cervical Cancer Screening and Management.Journal of lower genital tract disease · 2020Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of repeated self-sampling for HPV testing in primary cervical screening: a randomized study.BMC cancer · 2020Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo determine the results of combined cytology and high-risk human papilloma virus (HR HPV) tests at 6 and 18 months postcolposcopy treatment at one Irish colposcopy centre.
methodsAll women who attended the centre's colposcopy smear clinic for a co-test 6 months (initial test) posttreatment were included in the audit (n = 251).
resultsThe results revealed negative HR HPV for 79 % (n = 198) of women tested 6 months after treatment and positive results for 21 % (n = 53). HR HPV testing was more sensitive than cytology and led to early detection of residual disease. No women with negative HR HPV had high-grade cytology.
conclusionHR HPV is more sensitive than cytology for detection of persistent CIN. However, 19 women with positive HR HPV had normal colposcopy with no persistent CIN detected. A national cost-benefit analysis is recommended to determine the value of the second co-test.
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.