Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28830493›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2017

Unsatisfactory colposcopy: clinical decision-making in conditions of uncertainty.

Kristyn M Manley, Rebecca A Simms, Sarah Platt, Amit Patel, Rachna Bahl

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Comparison of Sampling Devices for Endocervical Curetting.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kristyn M ManleyDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, St. Michael's Hospital, Level D, St. Michaels Hospital, Bristol, BS2 8EG, UK. km12688@bristol.ac.uk.
Rebecca A SimmsDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, St. Michael's Hospital, Level D, St. Michaels Hospital, Bristol, BS2 8EG, UK.
Sarah PlattDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, St. Michael's Hospital, Level D, St. Michaels Hospital, Bristol, BS2 8EG, UK.
Amit PatelDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, St. Michael's Hospital, Level D, St. Michaels Hospital, Bristol, BS2 8EG, UK.
Rachna BahlDepartment of Women's Health, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, St. Michael's Hospital, Level D, St. Michaels Hospital, Bristol, BS2 8EG, UK.
St Michaels Hospital · GBSt Michael's Hospital · GBUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnsatisfactory colposcopy, where the cells of interest are not visible in women with a positive cervical screening test, is a common area of clinical uncertainty due to the lack of clear evidence and guidance. Colposcopists' opinions and experiences are likely to have a significant influence on service provision and the development of national policy. The aim of this study was to analyse decision-making when applied to women with unsatisfactory colposcopy.

methodsA multi-centre qualitative study utilizing a series of focus groups in an English healthcare region. Sampling aimed to ensure heterogeneity of experience and healthcare provider demographics. A topic guide covered a range of clinical and cytological variables and was compiled by the researchers and three expert Colposcopists. Using an iterative approach, thematic analysis was selected as the most appropriate method to identify factors affecting decision-making.

resultsTwenty-three Colposcopists from four units participated. The decision to treat was easier in women with high-grade cytology and high risk women with low-grade cytology such as heavy smokers, poor attenders, older women, those who had completed their families and women opting for treatment. Where decision-making was more complex, intuition and a multi-disciplinary approach were used to guide management. Areas of dissonance, which are affected by paucity of evidence and emotive factors, included cytological collection device, clinical setting and length of conservative follow-up and depth of excision in women at high risk of treatment-related morbidity.

conclusionsAnxiety of missing a cancer deters long-term cytological follow-up, resulting in heterogeneity of care and higher than anticipated excisional treatments in women with low-grade screening and unsatisfactory colposcopy. In areas of clinical uncertainty when decisions are dominated by affect, clinical guidance can reduce the difficulty and anxiety of decision-making.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingColposcopyPatient ParticipationCervix UteriDiagnostic ErrorsFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMass ScreeningPapillomavirus InfectionsQualitative ResearchRisk AssessmentUncertaintyUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAttitudesClinical uncertaintyDecision-makingUnsatisfactory colposcopy

Identifiers

PMID28830493
PMCPMC5567663
OpenAlexW2747548970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.