ArticleEuropean journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP)2019
Conization and healthcare use: a population-based register study.
Article in European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Recent increase in incidence of cervical precancerous lesions in Norway: Nationwide study from 1992 to 2016.International journal of cancer · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess whether negative psychological consequences of conization reported in questionnaire studies translated into increased use of the healthcare services that could relieve such symptoms. This was a population-based register study comparing women undergoing conization with a control group of women with normal cytology results. Data were derived from Danish registers. Using the difference-in-differences method, we measured contacts with general practitioners (GPs), hospitals, psychiatrist/psychologists, and use of anxiolytic and antidepressant prescription drugs over 5 years 'before' and 'after' the conization in the study group, and in comparable periods in the control group. During the 'before' period, women who later had a conization had greater contact with GPs and hospitals, and slightly more contact with psychiatrist/psychologists, than control women. In both groups, healthcare use increased significantly from the 'before' to the 'after' period. For contacts with GPs and hospitals, the increase was significantly larger for the conization group than for the control group, but this could be attributed to the standard postconization follow-up process. In the 'before' period, women who later had a conization used fewer drugs than women of the control-group, but their drug use increased similarly over time. The conization event did not result in an increased use of the healthcare services that could relieve potential negative side effects. However, women who underwent a conization seemed to constitute a select group as they already used GPs and hospitals more frequently, and anxiolytic and antidepressant drugs less frequently, than other women in the years 'before' the conization event.
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.