GuidelineJournal of lower genital tract disease2017
ASCCP Colposcopy Standards: Colposcopy Quality Improvement Recommendations for the United States.
Guideline in Journal of lower genital tract disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Canadian Guideline on the Management of a Positive Human Papillomavirus Test and Guidance for Specific Populations.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Guideline
- Risk of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2 or Worse by Cytology, Human Papillomavirus 16/18, and Colposcopy Impression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Pooled it
- Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians · 2018Pooled it
- Challenges in the future of cancer screening.International journal of cancer · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy of the Siriraj Portable Digital Cervicography Device Versus Standard Colposcopy for Detecting CIN2Journal of medical virology · 2025Article
- Supporting the global reduction of cervical cancer: challenges in colposcopy practice and training.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Endocervical Curettage in Colposcopy in the Turkish Cervical Cancer Screening Program.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Rare Complication Post-Conization for Cervical Dysplasia: Rectovaginal Fistula.Clinics and practice · 2023Article
- Colposcopy Accuracy and Diagnostic Performance: A Quality Control and Quality Assurance Survey in Italian Tertiary-Level Teaching and Academic Institutions-The Italian Society of Colposcopy and Cervico-Vaginal Pathology (SICPCV).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Application of EfficientNet-B0 and GRU-based deep learning on classifying the colposcopy diagnosis of precancerous cervical lesions.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- The challenges of colposcopy for cervical cancer screening in LMICs and solutions by artificial intelligence.BMC medicine · 2020Article
- Article
- Quality of the screening process: An overlooked critical factor and an essential component of shared decision making about screening.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) Colposcopy Standards recommendations address the role of and approach to colposcopy and biopsy for cervical cancer prevention in the United States. The recommendations were developed by an expert working group appointed by ASCCP's Board of Directors. The ASCCP Quality Improvement Working Group developed evidence-based guidelines to promote best practices and reduce errors in colposcopy and recommended indicators to measure colposcopy quality. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe working group performed a systematic review of existing major society and national guidelines and quality indicators. An initial list of potential quality indicators was developed and refined through successive iterative discussions, and draft quality indicators were proposed. The draft recommendations were then reviewed and commented on by the entire Colposcopy Standards Committee, posted online for public comment, and presented at the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy 2017 World Congress for further comment. All comments were considered, additional adjustments made, and the final recommendations approved by the entire Task Force.
resultsEleven quality indicators were selected spanning documentation, biopsy protocols, and time intervals between index screening tests and completion of diagnostic evaluation.
conclusionsThe proposed quality indicators are intended to serve as a starting point for quality improvement in colposcopy at a time when colposcopy volume is decreasing and individual procedures are becoming technically more difficult to perform.
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.