Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30033024›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2018

Cervical Cancer Screening Intervals Preferred by U.S. Women.

Crystale Purvis Cooper, Mona Saraiya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

Crystale Purvis CooperSoltera Center for Cancer Prevention and Control, Tucson, Arizona.
Mona SaraiyaDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. Electronic address: msaraiya@cdc.gov.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMany U.S. women continue to be screened annually for cervical cancer, despite current guidelines that recommend 3- or 5-year screening intervals depending on screening modality and patient age.

methodsData from 2012 and 2015 web-based surveys of U.S. adults were analyzed in 2017 to investigate U.S. women's cervical cancer screening preferences. The study was limited to women aged ≥18 years without a hysterectomy or cervical cancer diagnosis (2012 n=1,380, 2015 n=1,339).

resultsWomen's preference for 3- or 5-year screening intervals doubled during the study period (2012: 31.2%, 2015: 64.2%, p<0.001). The most preferred screening options in 2015 were co-testing every 3 years with the Pap and human papillomavirus tests (34.0%) and annual Pap testing (30.4%)-neither of which were recommended at that time or currently. Use of 3- and 5-year Pap testing intervals increased during the study period (2012: 6.9%, 2015: 12.9%, p<0.001), whereas annual Pap testing declined (2012: 48.5%, 2015: 35.6%, p<0.001). Among women who were regularly screened and preferred 3- or 5-year screening intervals, the minority reported screening practices that matched this preference (2012: 24.1%, 2015: 29.3%, p=0.71).

conclusionsWomen's preference for longer cervical cancer screening intervals has increased rapidly and outpaced utilization. At the same time, many women continue to be screened annually. Expanding appropriate screening may require increasing women's and providers' comfort with screening recommendations.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapanicolaou TestPapillomavirus InfectionsPractice Guidelines as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesUterine Cervical NeoplasmsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30033024
PMCPMC6102077

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.