Trial reportBMC public health2017
Cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase screening coverage for cervical cancer in Spain: the CRIVERVA study.
Trial report in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01373723 (Economic Evaluation of Three Populational Screening Strategies for Cervical Cancer in the County of Valles Occidental), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
Economic Evaluation of Three Populational Screening Strategies for Cervical Cancer in the County of Valles Occidental: CRICERVA Clinical Trial.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening among underserved women in Europe.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase cervical screening uptake at first invitation (STRATEGIC).Journal of medical screening · 2018Pooled it
- The Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cervical Cancer Screening Using a Systematic Invitation System in Lithuania.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Trial
- Increasing Cervical Cancer Screening Coverage: A Randomised, Community-Based Clinical Trial.PloS one · 2017Trial
- Research can be integrated into public health policy-making: global lessons for and from Spanish economic evaluations.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Comparative cost analysis of cervical cancer screening programme based on molecular detection of HPV in Spain.BMC women's health · 2021Article
- Estimating the epidemiological impact and cost-effectiveness profile of a nonavalent HPV vaccine in Spain.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2019Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening Programs in Europe: The Transition Towards HPV Vaccination and Population-Based HPV Testing.Viruses · 2018Review
- Incidence and mortality due to cervical cancer in 4 south European countries.Porto biomedical journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the study is to carry out a cost-effectiveness analysis of three different interventions to promote the uptake of screening for cervical cancer in general practice in the county of Valles Occidental, Barcelona, Spain.
methodsWomen aged from 30 to 70 years (n = 15,965) were asked to attend a general practice to be screened. They were randomly allocated to one of four groups: no intervention group (NIG); one group where women received an invitation letter to participate in the screening (IG1); one group where women received an invitation letter and informative leaflet (IG2); and one group where women received an invitation letter, an informative leaflet and a phone call reminder (IG3). Clinical effectiveness was measured as the percentage increase in screening coverage. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the perspective of the public health system with a time horizon of three to five years - the duration of the randomised controlled clinical trial. In addition, a deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results are presented according to different age groups.
resultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the most cost-effective intervention, IG1, compared with opportunistic screening was € 2.78 per 1% increase in the screening coverage. The age interval with the worst results in terms of efficiency was women aged < 40 years.
conclusionsIn a population like Catalonia, with around 2 million women aged 30 to 70 years and assuming that 40% of these women were not attending general practice to be screened for cervical cancer, the implementation of an intervention to increase screening coverage which consists of sending a letter would cost on average less than € 490 for every 1000 women.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01373723 .
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.