ArticlePreventive medicine2016
Comparative effectiveness of two outreach strategies for cervical cancer screening.
Article in Preventive medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does mailing unsolicited HPV self-sampling kits to women overdue for cervical cancer screening impact uptake of other preventive health services in a United States integrated delivery system?Preventive medicine · 2022Trial
- A global scoping review of interventions to increase participation in screening programmes for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer between 2016 and 2025.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Out of reach? Correlates of cervical cancer underscreening in women with varying levels of healthcare interactions in a United States integrated delivery system.Preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Interventions on Increasing Participation in Cervical Cancer Screening.The journal of nursing research : JNR · 2019Observational
- Improving the promise of embedded pragmatic trials: Surmountable barriers encountered in an evaluation of home-based HPV self-sampling to increase cervical cancer screening in overdue women.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2019Article
- Rationale and design of the HOME trial: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of home-based human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling for increasing cervical cancer screening uptake and effectiveness in a U.S. healthcare system.Contemporary clinical trials · 2018Article
- Breast cancer screening outreach effectiveness: Mammogram-specific reminders vs. comprehensive preventive services birthday letters.Preventive medicine · 2017Article
- Cancer Screening Reminders: Addressing the Spectrum of Patient Preferences.The Permanente journal · 2017Article
- Latina and Black/African American Women's Perspectives on Cancer Screening and Cancer Screening Reminders.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2016Article
- A Scoping Literature Review on Evidence-Based Strategies to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTest-specific reminder letters can improve cancer screening adherence. Little is known about the effectiveness of a reminder system that targets the whole person by including multiple screening recommendations per letter.
methodsWe compared the effectiveness of a Pap-specific reminder letter sent 27months after a woman's last Pap, to a reminder letter that included up to seven preventive service recommendations sent before a woman's birthday ("birthday letter") on Pap smear adherence from a natural experiment occurring in routine clinical care. Participants included 82,016 women from Washington State who received 72,615 Pap-specific letters between 2003 and 2007 and 100,218 birthday letters between 2009 and 2012. We defined adherence as having a Pap test within a six month window around the Pap test due date. Using logistic regression, we calculated adjusted odds ratios (OR) for adherence with 95% confidence intervals (CI) following the birthday letter with 1-2 recommendations, 3-5 recommendations, and 6-7 recommendations compared to the Pap-specific letter. All analyses were stratified by whether a woman was up-to-date or overdue for screening at the time she received a letter.
resultsAdjusted ORs showed reduced adherence following the birthday letter compared with the Pap-specific letter for up-to-date women whether the letter had 1-2 recommendations (OR=0.37, 95%CI=0.36-0.39), 3-5 recommendations (OR=0.44, 95%CI=0.42-0.45), or 6-7 recommendations (OR=0.36, 95%CI=0.32-0.40). We noted no difference in Pap-test adherence between letter types for overdue women.
conclusionsIn conclusion, for women regularly adherent to screening, an annual birthday letter containing reminders for multiple preventive services was less effective at promoting cervical cancer screening compared with a Pap-specific letter.
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.