Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30549273›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of cancer2019

Psychological effect of cervical cancer screening when changing primary screening method from cytology to high-risk human papilloma virus testing.

Trude Andreassen, Bo T Hansen, Birgit Engesaeter, Dana Hashim, Nathalie C Støer, Ameli Tropé, Kåre Moen, Giske Ursin, Elisabete Weiderpass

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The histologic results in multiple-type HPV infections.Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. The Impact of HPV Diagnosis and Abnormal Cervical Cytology Results on Sexual Dysfunction and Anxiety.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Trude AndreassenCancer Registry of Norway, Institute of PopulationBased Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6503-5162
Bo T HansenCancer Registry of Norway, Institute of PopulationBased Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway.
Birgit EngesaeterCancer Registry of Norway, Institute of PopulationBased Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway.
Dana HashimCancer Registry of Norway, Institute of PopulationBased Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway.
Nathalie C StøerOslo University Hospital, Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Women's Health, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-8994-9332
Ameli TropéCancer Registry of Norway, Institute of PopulationBased Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway.
Kåre MoenInstitute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Giske UrsinCancer Registry of Norway, Institute of PopulationBased Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway.
Elisabete WeiderpassCancer Registry of Norway, Institute of PopulationBased Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway.
Cancer Registry of Norway · NOUniversity of Oslo · NOKarolinska Institutet · SEOslo University Hospital · NOUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From 2015, Norway has implemented high-risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) testing in primary screening for cervical cancer. Women aged 34-69 years, living in four counties, have been pseudo-randomly assigned (1:1 randomization) to either hrHPV testing every 5 years (followed by cytology if hrHPV is positive), or cytology testing every 3 years (followed by hrHPV testing if low-grade cytology is detected). We compared anxiety and depression scores among participants by screening arm and results. In total, 1,008 women answered a structured questionnaire that included the validated Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4). The Relative Risk Ratio (RRR) of mild vs. normal anxiety and depression scores, and moderate/severe vs. normal anxiety and depression scores, were estimated by multinomial logistic regression with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Compared to women who were screened with cytology, women randomized to hrHPV testing were not more likely to have mild anxiety and depression scores (RRR 0.96, CI 0.70-1.31) nor more likely to have moderate/severe anxiety and depression scores (RRR 1.14, CI 0.65-2.02). Women with five different combinations of abnormal screening test results were not more likely to have mild or moderate/severe vs. normal anxiety and depression scores than women with normal screening results. The likelihood of having abnormal long-term (4-24 months after the screening) anxiety or depression scores among women 34 years and older was not affected by screening method or screening results. The results of our study suggest that a change to hrHPV testing in primary screening would not increase psychological distress among participants.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAnxietyDepressionEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNorwayPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsRegistriesUterine Cervical Neoplasmsanxiety and depressioncancercancer registrycervical cancer screeningepidemiologyhealth-care systemhigh-risk human papilloma virus testingHPVNorwaypreventionScandinaviawomen

Identifiers

PMID30549273
PMCPMC6590646
OpenAlexW2903973276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.