Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2017
Self-sampling to improve cervical cancer screening coverage in Switzerland: a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 6 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Screening for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer: systematic reviews to inform an update to recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Assessment of HPV screening modalities within primary care: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Invitation strategy of vaginal HPV self-sampling to improve participation in cervical cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Does self-sampling for human papilloma virus testing have the potential to increase cervical cancer screening? An updated meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2019Pooled it
- Citizen science as an instrument for women's health research.Nature medicine · 2024Article
- HPV Testing Behaviors and Willingness to Use HPV Self-sampling at Home Among African American (AA) and Sub-Saharan African Immigrant (SAI) Women.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2022Article
- Harms and benefits of cervical cancer screening among non-attenders in Switzerland: The transition towards HPV-based screening.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Feasibility of HPV self-sampling pathway in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal using a human-centred design approach.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2021Article
- HPV sampling options for cervical cancer screening: preferences of urban-dwelling Canadians in a changing paradigm.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2020Article
- Acceptability, Feasibility and Uptake of HPV Self-Sampling Among Immigrant Minority Women: a Focused Literature Review.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2019Review
- Cervical Cancer Screening Programs in Europe: The Transition Towards HPV Vaccination and Population-Based HPV Testing.Viruses · 2018Review
- Self-Sampling for Human Papillomavirus Testing: Increased Cervical Cancer Screening Participation and Incorporation in International Screening Programs.Frontiers in public health · 2018Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is to evaluate whether self-sampling can increase screening attendance of women who do not attend regular screening in Switzerland.
methodsParticipants were proactively recruited in Geneva between September 2011 and November 2015. Women (25-69 years) who had not undergone CC screening in the last 3 years were considered eligible. Through a 1 : 1 ratio randomisation, enrolled participants were invited to either undergo liquid-based cytology, which was performed by a health-care provider (control group, CG) or to take a self-sample for HPV-testing, which was mailed to their home (intervention group, IG).
resultsA total of 331 and 336 women were randomised in the CG and in the IG, respectively. Overall, 7.3% (95% CI: 4.9-10.6) women in the CG and 5.7% (95% CI: 3.6-8.7) women in the IG did not undergo the initial screening (P=0.400). There were 1.95% (95% CI: 0.8-4.3) women in the CG and 5.05% (95% CI: 3.1-8.1) women in the IG with a positive screen who did not attend triage and colposcopy (P=0.036).
conclusionsThe participation in CC screening in women offered self-sampling was not higher than among those offered specimen collection by a clinician. Compliance with further follow-up for women with a positive HPV test on the self-sample requires further attention.
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.