ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2015
Missed connections: Unintended consequences of updated cervical cancer screening guidelines on screening rates for sexually transmitted infections.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea in primary health care: systematic reviews on effectiveness and patient preferences.Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Gonorrhea and Chlamydia Testing and Case Rates Among Women Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Clinician acceptability of self-collected human papillomavirus swabs as a primary cervical cancer screening method.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2022Article
- Educational implications of changing the guidelines for the digital rectal examination.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019Article
- Cancer screening inequities in a time of primary care reform: a population-based longitudinal study in Ontario, Canada.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- The Effect of Changes in Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines on Chlamydia Testing.Annals of family medicine · 2017Article
- Article
- Recommendations for the routine screening pelvic examination: Could they have a negative effect on physician competence?Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
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 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the effects of the updated 2012 cervical cancer screening guidelines on the rates of sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening in primary care.
designRetrospective chart review.
settingFive academic family practice units at St Michael's Hospital in Toronto, Ont.
participantsFemale patients, aged 19 to 25, who had at least 1 visit with a physician at 1 of the 5 academic family practice units during a 12-month period before (May 1, 2011, to April 30, 2012) or after (November 1, 2012, to October 31, 2013) the release of the updated guidelines.
main outcome measuresNumber of women who received Papanicolaou tests or underwent STI screening; rates of STI screening performed during a Pap test or a periodic health examination; screening rates for HIV, syphilis, and hepatitis C; and the methods used for STI screening before and after the release of the updated guidelines. Results Before the release of the 2012 guidelines, 42 of 100 women had Pap tests and 40 of 100 women underwent STI screening. After the release of the guidelines, 17 of 100 women had Pap tests and 20 of 100 women received STI screening. Female patients were less likely to undergo STI screening under the 2012 guidelines compared with the 2005 guidelines (odds ratio 0.38, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.74; P = .003).
conclusionImplementation of the 2012 cervical cancer screening guidelines was associated with lower rates of STI screening in the primary care setting. Primary care physicians should screen at-risk women for STIs at any clinically appropriate encounter and consider using noninvasive self-sampling methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26759845PMC4607350W2176385013What 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.