Trial reportRadiology and oncology2018
Randomised trial of HPV self-sampling among non-attenders in the Slovenian cervical screening programme ZORA: comparing three different screening approaches.
Trial report in Radiology and oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 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
- Offering HPV self-sampling kits: an updated meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies to increase participation in cervical cancer screening.British journal of cancer · 2023Pooled 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
- Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2019Pooled it
- Trial
- Implementation of a self-sampling HPV test for non-responders to cervical cancer screening in Japan: secondary analysis of the ACCESS trial.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Evidence from Europe on implementation, participation and performance of self-collection for cervical cancer screening.Future oncology (London, England) · 2026Review
- HPV-Driven Cervical Carcinogenesis: Genetic and Epigenetic Mechanisms and Diagnostic Approaches.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Addressing COVID-19 Screening Delays: The Impact of HPV Self-Sampling on Non-Attenders in a Cervical Cancer Screening Program.Cancers · 2024Article
- Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling for Unscreened Women Aged 24 Years During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluating Opt-In Vaginal Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling: Participation Rates and Detection of High-Grade Lesions (CIN2+) among Unscreened Japanese Women Aged 30-39.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluation of self-sampling-based cervical cancer screening strategy using HPV Selfy CE-IVD test coupled with home-collection kit: a clinical study in Italy.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Overview of organisational methods of primary cervical lesion screening programmes that use human papillomavirus testing.Journal of medical screening · 2023Review
- Widening the offer of human papillomavirus self-sampling to all women eligible for cervical screening: Make haste slowly.International journal of cancer · 2023Review
- Article
- Diagnostic performance of p16/Ki-67 dual immunostaining at different number of positive cells in cervical smears in women referred for colposcopy.Radiology and oncology · 2021Article
- Long term results of follow-up after HPV self-sampling with devices Qvintip and HerSwab in women non-attending cervical screening programme.Radiology and oncology · 2021Article
- Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening Postpandemic: Self-Sampling Opportunities to Accelerate the Elimination of Cervical Cancer.International journal of women's health · 2021Review
- Methodological Errors in Clinical Studies Published by Medical Journals of Ex-Yugoslav Countries.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background To overcome obstacles within the Slovenian organised cervical cancer screening programme, a randomised pilot study of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling among non-attenders was performed, aiming to assess three different screening approaches. Participants and methods Non-attenders aged 30-64 years from two Slovenian regions were randomised to two HPV self-sampling groups-the opt-in (I1, n = 14.400) and the opt-out (I2, n = 9.556), with a control group (P, n = 2.600). Self-collected samples were analysed using the Hybrid Capture 2 assay. HPV-positive women were invited to a colposcopy. The overall and type-specific intention-to-screen response rates and histological outcomes with a positive predictive value (PPV) according to the women's age, the screening approach, the level of protection resulting from previous screening history, and the region of residence were assessed. Results Of the 26.556 women enrolled, 8.972 (33.8%) responded with self-sample for HPV testing and/or traditional cytology within one year of enrolment. Response rates were 37.7%, 34.0% and 18.4% (p < 0.050) for opt-out, opt-in and control groups. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)2+ was diagnosed in 3.9/1.000, 3.4/1.000, and 3.1/1.000 women (p > 0.050), respectively. PPV of the HPV self-sampling was 12.0% and 9.6% for CIN2+ and CIN3+. The highest PPV was obtained in non-attenders in screening programme for more than 10-years and concordant results of HPV testing with 40.8% for CIN2+ and 38.8% for CIN3+. Conclusions The results of our study show that a high response to HPV self-sampling can be achieved also in an opt-in approach, if women are encouraged to choose between self-sampling at home and screening with gynaecologist. In addition, clinically important risk difference for a high-grade cervical lesion exists in the case of a positive result of HPV testing on self-collected samples, depending on the length of the interval since last screening. Stratified management of these women should be strongly considered. Women who were not screened with cytology for at least 10 years should be referred to immediate colposcopy for histology verification instead to delayed re-testing.
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.