Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30541595›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2018

Preference of specimen collection methods for human papillomavirus detection for cervical cancer screening: a cross-sectional study of high-risk women in Mombasa, Kenya.

Griffins O Manguro, Linnet N Masese, Kishor Mandaliya, Susan M Graham, R Scott McClelland, Jennifer S Smith

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Griffins O ManguroKenyatta National Hospital, P.O. Box 91109, Mombasa, 80103, Kenya. gmanguro@uw.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9226-0955
Linnet N MaseseDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, P.O Box 357236, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
Kishor MandaliyaPathcare Laboratories, Mombasa, Kenya.
Susan M GrahamDepartments of Epidemiology, Global Health, and Medicine, University of Washington, P.O Box 359909, Seattle, WA, USA.
R Scott McClellandDepartments of Epidemiology, Global Health, and Medicine, University of Washington, P.O Box 359909, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jennifer S SmithUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
University of Nairobi · KEGoCare Health Solutions Limited · KEKenyatta National Hospital · KEUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

University of Washington/Fred Hutch Center for AIDS ResearchP30AI027757 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI CONNIE L CELUM · 1988 to 2026
$104.9M
Promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity in Research Training to Optimize HIV Prevention and TreatmentD43TW009580 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI CAREY FARQUHAR, John Kinuthia · 2013 to 2026
$4.8M
RCT of an Implementation Science Tool to Integrate HIV testing into Family Planning Services K24HD088229 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MCCLELLAND, RAYMOND SCOTT · 2016 to 2020
$863k
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW009580Fogarty International Center D43 TW009580National Institutes of Health K24 HD88229National Institutes of Health NIH grant P30-AI27757NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI027757NICHD NIH HHS K24 HD088229
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSelf-collection of genital specimens for high-risk types of human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection may increase cervical cancer screening uptake. We hypothesized that women would prefer self-collection to clinician-collection of genital specimens. To test this hypothesis, and women's preference between two different self-collection approaches, a total of 199 women were enrolled in a cross-sectional study in Mombasa, Kenya. MATERIALS AND

methodsParticipants provided self-collected specimens using the Evalyn cytobrush (Rovers) stored in a dry tube and the Viba cytobrush (Rovers) stored in wet Aptima media (Hologic). A clinician also collected cervical specimens for hrHPV testing and for cytology, and performed visual inspection using acetic acid. A post-examination questionnaire assessed preferences for the different methods of specimen collection. To test the difference in proportions for each collection method, we performed an exact binomial probability test, under the null hypothesis that women would prefer each specimen-collection method equally.

resultsMost women preferred clinician-collection over self-collection (68% versus 32%, p < 0.01). For self-collection, dry-self collection with the Evalyn brush was preferred over the wet-selection with the Viba brush (53% versus 27%, p < 0.01). There was no association between preference for self-collection and preference for a particular self-collection cytobrush.

conclusionFurther research to understand and address obstacles to self-collection of genital specimens may be needed to improve the uptake of self-collection for cervical cancer screening, especially in settings with poor access to trained healthcare providers.

Indexed as

AdultCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansKenyaMass ScreeningPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsSpecimen HandlingUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCervical cancerClinician-collectionHrHPVKenyaScreeningSelf-collection

Identifiers

PMID30541595
PMCPMC6291975
OpenAlexW2905020130

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.